Harrell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Santellan v. State (1997), Alvarado v. State (1995)
1 federal appellate · 37 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 Bourjaily v. United States · Huddleston v. United States · Montgomery v. State · National Educational Support Systems, Inc. v. Autoskill, Inc. · Keene Corp. 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Relevancy Conditioned on Fact. When the relevancy of evidence depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the court shall admit it upon, or subject, to the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of the condition.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“in deciding whether to admit extraneous offense evidence in the guilt/innocence phase of trial, the trial court must, under rule 104(b), make an initial determination at the proffer of the evidence, that a jury could reasonably find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the extraneous offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Fischer v. State · Reed v. State“In the Rule 404(b) context, similar act evidence is relevant only if the jury can reasonably conclude that the act occurred and that the defendant was the actor.” 485 U.S. 681, 689 , 108 S.Ct. 1496, 1501 , 99 L.Ed.2d 771, 782 (1988). Some states take a similar view. See, e.g., State v. McDonald, 500 N.W.2d 243, 246 (S.D.1993) (”
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.