Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 157 Fla. 121 - Mitchell v. State

Mitchell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
3
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably Askins v. United States (1958), 459 So. 2d 306 - Tucker v. State (1984)

5 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

10019461950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Beazell v. State of Ohio Chatfield · Sawyer v. State of Florida · Mahood v. Bessemer Properties Incorporated · Deeb v. State · Pickeron v. State of Florida

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

  1. “"It is within the power of the legislature to fix the time in which prosecution for any offense may be commenced. It is not competent, however, for the legislature to fix the time within which a prosecution may be commenced if the prosecution is commenced by indictment and a different time if the prosecution be commenced by information. To hold otherwise would be tantamount to allowing the prosecuting officer to determine whether or not the statute of limitations should or should not be applicable. ... . "A jury has said this man is not guilty of murder in the first degree and, therefore, he is entitled to every benefit to which any one else can be entitled who is also only guilty of murder in the second degree. This right of equal protection may not be taken away by the State choosing to proceed with the prosecution by some method which will deprive him of the benefit of the statute of limitations while others guilty of the like offense may have the benefit of the statute of limitations because the State has chosen to proceed with the prosecution by a different method." Id. at 75 (emphasis supplied).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"It is within the power of the legislature to fix the time in which prosecution for any offense may be commenced. It is not competent, however, for the legislature to fix the time within which a prosecution may be commenced if the prosecution is commenced by indictment and a different time if the prosecution be commenced by information. To hold otherwise would be tantamount to allowing the prosecuting officer to determine whether or not the statute of limitations should or should not be applicable." 25 So.2d at 75 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]he time within which an offense is committed is a jurisdictional fact in all cases subject to limitation.”
    3 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.