State v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
May 2006
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 277 So. 2d 126 - State v. Prieur · 664 So. 2d 94 - State v. Johnson · 278 So. 2d 781 - State v. Moore · State v. Jackson · 616 So. 2d 1353 - State v. Fontenot
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Absent evidence that the state evaded Prieur notice requirements by deliberately reserving its other crimes evidence for cross-examination or rebuttal, the Prieur notice requirements do not apply where, as here, defendant, through his own testimony, makes the other crimes evidence relevant. The record does not reveal that the state withheld using the other crimes evidence in its case-in-chief to circumvent Prieur notice requirements. Thus, under the circumstances, the other crimes evidence was admissible without Prieur notice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Barling
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.