Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently April 1981
24 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 Crum v. State · 171 So. 2d 893 - State v. Sebastian · 132 So. 2d 763 - Eizenman v. State · Dixon v. State · 154 So. 2d 327 - San Fratello 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We know of no statute or case law in this jurisdiction which requires more than one witness in a criminal case nor do we believe it proper for an appellate court to reverse a conviction of guilt upon the basis of insufficiency of the State's evidence merely because the State produced but one witness and his testimony was contradicted by the defendant."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hargrett 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.