739 So. 2d 931 - State v. Curtis’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
December 2011
most recently cited
13 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · United States v. Ross · California v. Acevedo · State v. Oliveaux
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Upon motion of a defendant, a mistrial shall be ordered when a remark or comment, made within the hearing of the jury by the judge, district attorney, or a court official, during the trial or in argument, refers directly or indirectly to: . . . (2) Another crime committed or alleged to have been committed by the defendant as to which evidence is not admissible; ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“when it relates to conduct that constitutes an integral part of the act or transaction that is the subject of the present proceeding.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Snavely · State v. Jackson“This court has approved the admission of other crimes evidence when it is related and intertwined with the charged offense to such an extent that the state could not have accurately presented its case without reference to it. In such cases, the purpose served by admission of other crimes evidence is not to depict the defendant as a bad man, but rather to complete the story of the crime on trial by proving its immediate context of happenings near in time and place. The concomitant other crimes do not affect the accused's character, because they were done, if at all, as parts of a whole; therefore, the trier of fact will attribute all of the criminal conduct to the defendant or none of it. And, because of the close connection in time and location, the defendant is unlikely to be unfairly surprised [citations omitted].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Snavely
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.