Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 158 SO2D 803 - Norris v. State

Norris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
June 1989
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 1989

15 state decisions

60196319701980decided

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 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State · Suarez v. State of Florida · Talley v. State · Wrather v. State · 143 So. 2d 484 - Williams 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Without going so far as to hold, with some of the Courts, that the proof of the independent crime must be ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ we approve the rule that, to render evidence of an independent crime admissible, the proof of its commission, and of the connection of the accused on trial therewith, must be not ‘vague and uncertain,’ but clear and convincing. Obviously, an absolute es sential is that (1) a former crime has been committed, and (2) committed by the identical person on trial. Only thus can identification, or other proof of guilt, of the accused in the pending case be aided by evidence of the independent crime. And this limitation upon admissibility apples equally to all the exceptions to the general rule excluding evidence of other crimes, whether introduced to prove identity, or for any other purpose.” '”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Where the evidence is offered to show a similar plan, scheme or design, the same must be shown in connection with the offense for which the defendant is on trial, and it must also be shown that the same or a substantially similar plan, scheme or design occurs as an incident to the collateral offense with which the defendant is likewise connected.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “* * * * * * "`* * * the strength of the independent evidence, the specific weakness which the similar fact evidence is admitted to remedy, the strength of the similar fact evidence itself. * * *'" * * * * * *”
    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.