Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 389 NJSUPER 302 - State v. Blakney

State v. Blakney’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2006
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Trident Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. · State v. Ramseur · State v. Locurto · State v. Cofield

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he limiting instruction should have said that if defendant committed the earlier acts, that evidence may not be considered on the homicide charge to show that defendant had a disposition to commit murder, not that it could not be “automatically” considered for that purpose. Reasonably understood, the use of “automatically” implied that the evidence could be considered, although not “automatically.” [Id. at 350, 913 A.2d at 120 (Weissbard, J., dissenting).]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “You don’t have the luxury of looking at these photographs and feeling the sorrow and anger and rage that I feel when I look at them, and if during the course of this trial I let those feelings out because I yelled too loud or because I threw a doll into that seat, forgive me. Every once in awhile I can’t remain distant anymore. It just gets the better of you. So I’m sorry if I offended you.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the disposition of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. Such evidence may be admitted for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident when such matters are relevant to a material issue in dispute.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.