107 So. 2d 16 - Frazier v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

cited by 90 later decisions

states following

October 2014

most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 88 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Knight v. State (1981), 408 So. 2d 1024 - Jent v. State (1981)

1 federal appellate · 88 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 Davis v. Illinois · Kansas City Star Co. v. United States · Nickels v. State · 10 Ill. 2d 430 - The People v. Davis · Parrish 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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“It is true that before a confession should be received in evidence there must be some independent proof of the corpus delicti. Parrish v. State, 1925, 90 Fla. 25 , 105 So. 130 ; Keir v. State, 1943, 152 Fla. 389 , 11 So.2d 886 . There should at least be some additional substantial evidence, either direct or circumstantial. Tucker v. State, 1912, 64 Fla. 518 , 59 So. 941 . The corpus delicti need not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but it is enough if the evidence tends to show that the crime was committed. McElveen v. State, Fla. 1954, 72 So.2d 785 ; Graham v. State, 1943, 153 Fla. 807 , 16 So.2d 59 . The only question is whether the evidence of the corpus delicti is prima facie sufficient to authorize the admission of the confession. Nickels v. State, 1925, 90 Fla. 659 , 106 So. 479 , supra; Graham v. State, supra. See Annotation: 45 A.L.R.2d 1316 (1954).”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Ussery v. State · Bassett v. State
“[a] confession should be excluded if the attending circumstances, or the declarations of those present at the making of the confession, are calculated to delude the prisoner as to his true position, or to exert improper and undue influence over his mind.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Black v. State · State v. Slifer
“"Whether the specific language used amounts to a threat or promise of benefit depends upon the circumstances in which it is used and on warrantable inferences drawn from the language and circumstances.... The confession may be untrustworthy because it has been associated with an attraction too strong to resist. III Wigmore on Evidence, § 824."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 294 So. 2d 54 - State v. Chorpenning

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.