656 So. 2d 95 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

cited by 71 later decisions

states following

October 2015

most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 70 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably 941 So. 2d 735 - Rubenstein v. State (2006), 737 So. 2d 322 - Puckett v. State (1999)

1 federal appellate · 70 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. Rodriguez · United States v. Causey · 567 So. 2d 237 - Johnston v. State · Peterson v. State · 606 So. 2d 1132 - Parker 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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“[W]herever 404(b) evidence is offered and there is an objection which is overruled, the objection shall be deemed an invocation of the right to MRE 403 balancing analysis and a limiting instruction. The court shall conduct an MRE analysis and, if the evidence passes that hurdle, give a limiting instruction unless the party objecting to the evidence objects to giving the limiting instruction.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Powell v. State · Jasper v. State
“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.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Powell v. State · Jasper v. State
“Even when other-crimes evidence is admissible under M.R.E. 404(b), it must pass through the `ultimate filter' of M.R.E. 403.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Jasper v. State · Johns 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.