Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 642 P2D 1294 - Taylor v. State

Taylor v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently July 2016

19 state decisions

901982199020002010decided

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 Upper Pecos Ass'n v. Peterson · Reardon v. Meacham · State v. McKenzie · United States v. Twilligear · State v. Walters

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

  1. “‘It has been held generally that the admission of evidence is within the sound discretion of the trial court and absent a clear abuse of discretion will not be disturbed. It is also the general rule that the foundation, relevance, competency, materiality, and remoteness are within the sound discretion of the trial court and will be upheld on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.’ (Footnotes omitted.)”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““within the sound discretion of the trial court and absent a clear abuse of discretion will not be disturbed. It is also the general rule that the foundation, relevance, competency, materiality, and remoteness are within the sound discretion of the trial court and will be upheld on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.” (Footnotes omitted.) The burden of establishing the clear abuse of discretion must be assumed by the party who attacks the ruling of the trial court. That party must establish that the ruling of the trial court was erroneous and that it did affect substantial rights of the party.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The admissibility of circumstantial evidence in criminal cases is extremely liberal, allowing for the admission of any circumstances which may throw light upon the matter being investigated. 29 Am. Jur.2d, Evidence, § 266, p. 315 (1967). [[Image here]] * * * “Evidence of circumstances which tend to connect the accused with the commission of a crime is properly admitted even though inconclusive in character.” 29 Am.Jur.2d, Evidence, § 266, p. 316 (1967).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.