Mozon v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 91 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Moses v. State (2003), Torres v. State (2002)
2 federal appellate · 91 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 Montgomery v. State · Roy v. Gravel · Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A. · Santellan v. State · McFarland 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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) how compellingly the evidence serves to make a fact of consequence more or less probable; (2) the potential the other evidence has to impress the jury “in some irrational but nevertheless indelible way”; (3) the tune the proponent will need to develop the evidence, during which the jury will be distracted from consideration of the indicted offense; (4) the force of the proponent’s need for this evidence to prove a fact of consequence, ie., does the proponent have other probative evidence available to him to help establish this fact, and is this fact related to an issue in dispute.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Prince v. State · Moore 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.