Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 872 P2D 93 - Johnson v. State

Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2023

11 state decisions

501994200020102020decided

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 · Bourjaily v. United States · Gibson v. United States · Martin v. Wainwright · Taylor v. State

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

  1. “We do note that one of the principal reasons for allowing evidence of prior acts or crimes in eases involving sex offenses is the fact that the usual situation places the testimony of a victim against that of the accused, increasing the pertinency of intent, knowledge, plan, motive, etc. In the words of one case cited by Justice Thomas: “The testimony was also admissible * ⅜ * as evidence tending to buttress the credibility of M and S, minor witnesses who had been charged by the accused with fabricating the evidence against him. Where proof necessarily depends on the credibility of testimony of child witnesses about sexual acts performed in private, and where the accusations of misconduct are flatly denied by the accused, evidence of similar acts may be received on the issue of the credibility of the minor witnesses.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““While intent and motive are frequently regarded as one and the same thing, there is a clear distinction between them. Motive is the cause or reason that moves the will and induces action for a definite result, while intent is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such result.””
    1 later decision 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.