Romanello v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently November 2011 · most notably State v. Young (1968), Montgomery v. State (1965)
29 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 Carroll v. United States · McNabb v. United States · Culombe v. Connecticut · Upshaw v. United States · Herman 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"* * * The `explanation' of possession thus referred to is that given by the accused when he is first under duty to speak after such recently stolen property is discovered in his possession. There is no burden upon the defendant to take the stand and explain such possession at the trial * * *." Romanello v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 160 So.2d 529, 534 , cert. denied 381 U.S. 915 , 85 S.Ct. 1541 , 14 L.Ed.2d 436 .”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““Appellant next contends that failure to take him before a committing magistrate ' following his arrest rendered his-later statements and admissions inadmissible in evidence. The courts have consistently rebuked .law enforcement officials for failure to present one accused' of crime before a magistrate ‘without unnecessary delay’ as provided by section 901.23, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. It is the rule, however, that due process of law is not violated in such instances unless it is shown that the delay in itself resulted in the confession under attack, and it will not be presumed that such was the-case.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Outten v. State · State v. Kitchens““Unexplained possession of the fruits of the crime, shortly after its commission, justifies the inference that possession is guilty possession. Such evidence is no more than prima facie evidence of guilt, but it may control if it is not seasonably explained by circumstances consistent with innocence.””
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.