State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably State v. Rhines (1996), State v. Wright (1999)
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Rogers · State v. Reddington · State v. Thompson · 76 Wis. 2d 72 - Sanford v. State · State v. Means
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Moeller · State v. Loftus“Two of the principal factors bearing upon the admissibility of evidence of other crimes are the sequential relationship between the offenses and modus operandi employed. Where the incidents are close in time and similar in modus operandi, evidence of other crimes is frequently admissible on, among other things, the question of defendant’s identity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kerkhove“"[E]vidence of other sex offenses having distinctive, similar characteristics to those charged is generally admissible on the issue of defendant's identity if such offenses are not too remote in time, are sufficiently similar to the offense charged, and are committed upon persons similar to the prosecuting witness." (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Moeller
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.