United States v. Gilmore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

30 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts is not admissible to prove character, but it may 'be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.' " United States v. Gomez, 733 F.2d 69 , 71-72 (8th Cir.1984) (quoting FED.R.EVID. 404(b)). We have previously determined that 41 [a] trial judge acts within his sound discretion in admitting evidence of prior wrongful acts when (1) the evidence is relevant to an issue in question other than that of the character of the defendant, (2) there is clear and convincing evidence that the defendant committed the prior acts, and (3) the potential unfair prejudice of the evidence does not substantially outweigh its probative value. 42 United States v. Gilmore, 730 F.2d 550 , 554 (8th Cir.1984). In addition, "[b]road discretion is afforded the trial judge in deciding whether to admit wrongful act evidence and his decision will not be overturned absent a clear showing that the requirements have not been met.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. Mensey

2. “[b]road discretion is afforded the trial judge in deciding whether to admit wrongful act evidence and his decision will not be overturned absent a clear showing that the requirements have not been met.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. Mensey