79 So. 3d 309 - State v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
41
cited by 41 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited
41 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 949 So. 2d 1236 - State v. Rose · 803 So. 2d 916 - State v. Kennedy · 779 So. 2d 675 - State v. Cosey · 830 So. 2d 984 - State v. Williams · 719 So. 2d 1037 - State v. McArthur
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When an accused is charged with a crime involving sexually assaultive behavior, or with acts that constitute a sex offense involving a victim who was under the age of seventeen at the time of the offense, evidence of the accused’s commission of another crime, wrong, or act involving sexually assaultive behavior or acts which indicate a lustful disposition toward children may be admissible and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant subject to the balancing test provided in Article 403.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage“Any inculpatory evidence is “prejudicial” to a defendant, especially when it is “probative” to a high degree. As used in the balancing test, “prejudicial” limits the introduction of probative evidence of prior misconduct only when it is unduly and unfairly prejudicial. The term “unfair prejudice,” as to a criminal defendant, speaks to the capacity of some concededly relevant evidence to lure the factfinder into declaring guilt on a ground different from proof specific to the offense charged.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“A trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. State v. Cosey, 97-2020 (La.11/28/00), 779 So.2d 675, 684 . This same standard is applied to rulings on the admission of other crimes evidence and evidence under La. C.E. art. 412.2. State v. Merritt, 04-204 (La.App. 5 Cir. 6/29/04) , 877 So.2d 1079, 1085 , writ denied, 04-1849 (La.11/24/04), 888 So.2d 228 ; State v. Humphries, 40,810 (La.App. 2 Cir. 4/12/06), 927 So.2d 650, 656 , writ denied, 06-1472 (La.12/15/06), 944 So.2d 1284 .”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.