Gezzi v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably 204 Ill. 2d 159 - People v. Donoho (2003), Gleason v. State (2002)
28 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 Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · Michelson v. United States · Santoni v. United States · Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Weintraub · Bourjaily v. United States
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Incest involves aberrant sexual behavior — it is a type of sexual deviancy that is difficult to understand. Therefore, a trier of fact might well wonder what would motivate the accused to behave in such bizarre manner. The evidence of prior sexual acts then was probative under the motive exception because of the unusual sexual behavior involved. It seems, however, that motive is usually thought of as the reason the crime was committed. If motive equates to reason, then perhaps appellant’s motive for having sexual relations with his younger daughter was that the older daughter was no longer available and the younger daughter was now taking her place. The older daughter’s testimony would be admissible for this purpose. “If the accused had a predilection to deviant sexual practices with young female relatives, it would not be unreasonable for the trier of fact to determine that he had a motive to commit the acts complained of by the victim in this case.” Brown, 736 P.2d at 1113 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. State“The testimony does not bear upon separate criminal occurrences or bad acts. Rather, it is helpful to explain what happened between appellant and his victim, and is integral to understanding the context of the crime charged. In some jurisdictions it is defined as the evidence of the context of the offense and consequently admissible with the reasoning that “events do not occur in a vacuum and the jury has the right to have the offense placed in its proper setting.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Longfellow v. State“tends to prevent confusion of issues, unfair surprise and undue prejudice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Wease 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.