Malone v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently July 2015 · most notably Lannan v. State (1992), Hardin v. State (1993)
44 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 Ristaino v. Ross · Maldonado v. State · Woods v. State · Cobbs v. State · Meeks v. State
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The test to bring evidence of other offenses within the common plan or scheme exception is not whether the other offenses have certain elements in common with the charged crime, but whether the other offenses tend to establish a preconceived plan by which the charged crime was committed. The crimes must, therefore, be so related in character, time and place of commission as to establish some plan which embraced both the prior and subsequent criminal activity and the charged crime.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Gibbs v. State · Hardin v. State“"Despite the continued vitality of the general rule, there are certain exceptions to and limitations upon it. Evidence of other criminal activity may be admissible in certain cases to prove an accused's identity, knowledge, intent or motive, or to demonstrate the common plan or scheme of criminal activity from which the accused originated the charged crime. (Citations omitted.) To be admissible according to any one of these exceptions, however, the evidence must possess substantial probative value. The test for admission is whether or not the evidence is so specifically and significantly related to the charged crime in time, place and cireumstances as to be logically relevant to one of the particular excepted purposes. (Citations omitted.) For instance, evidence of other criminal activity is commonly allowed to prove the identification of an accused according to the common plan or scheme exception. (Citations omitted.) The operative rationale is that if an accused is known to have committed a erime in a particularly distinct way, then that accused can pro-batively be considered as having committed another similar crime if the similar crime was also committed in the same particularly distinct way. In ruling upon the propriety of admitting evidence of other criminal activity according to the common plan exception, this Court requires a strong showing that the different criminal actions were so similarly conducted that the method of conduct can be considered akin to the accused'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Gibbs v. State · Jones v. State“to demonstrate the common plan or scheme of criminal activity from which the accused originated the charged crime.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. State · Sloan v. State
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.