Roop v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"We also note that Roop's convictions for child molesting, neglect of a dependent, and battery appear to raise a claim under the Indiana Double Jeopardy Clause. See Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (Ind.1999). Here, the appellant's brief was filed on December 29, 1999, and Richardson was readily available to be raised. In any event, we note that raising the issue would likely have had no practical effect because the sentences were ordered served concurrent Iy'””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davis v. State · Adams v. State

2. “In short, if the evidence bears on some issue other than criminal propensity and clears the balancing hurdle of Rule 403, it is admissible.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Craun v. State · Johnson v. State

3. “(1) decide if the evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is relevant to a matter other than the defendant's propensity to commit the charged act; and (2) balance the probative value of the evidence against its prejudicial effect pursuant to Rule 403. 9 When inquiring into relevance, the court may consider any factor it would ordinarily consider under Rule 402. 10 These may include the similarity and proximity in time of the prior bad act to the charged conduct, and will presumably typically include tying the act to the defendant.”

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