State v. Cross’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

34 state decisions

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

1. “We note that the legislature has expressed an intent to remove evidence of “similar prior conduct” in domestic abuse (non-homicide) prosecutions from the “clear and convincing” standard of Rule 404(b). See Minn.Stat. § 634.20 (1996). If this section is relevant to the admissibility of evidence in domestic abuse crimes not resulting in death of the victim, it would follow that a heightened standard would not apply to domestic abuse homicide cases.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. McCoy

2. “Evidence of similar prior conduct by the accused against the victim of domestic abuse * * * is admissible unless the probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issue, or mislead ing the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Waino

3. “committing any of the following offenses against a family or household member. Family or household members are persons who are presently residing together or have resided together in the past or persons involved in a significant romantic or sexual relationship.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. David Lee Cross v. James Bruton, Warden Michael Hatch