190 So. 2d 394 - Wolfe v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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

1. ““Because of the State’s failure to fully inform the jury regarding the extent of the consideration promised Hamilton for his coopération in testifying against appellant, we believe, and so hold, that the jury was denied facts which were necessary for it to have in order to properly pass upon the credibility of Hamilton’s testimony. Such failure constituted a deprivation of due process of law and so tainted the verdict against appellant as to render it void. The judgment appealed is reversed and the cause is remanded for a new trial.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 203 So. 2d 338 - State v. Wolfe

2. “It has long been the policy of the law that testimony of an accomplice is regarded with disfavor; is subject to close scrutiny; and, should be received with caution by the jury. The reason for the rule arises from the willingness of some persons charged with or convicted of a crime to wrongfully implicate others if by doing so, they may mitigate the penalty against themselves. (footnote omitted)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Powe v. State

3. ““The basic question posed for our decision is whether the State, in the prosecution of a defendant for crime, may in response to a proper inquiry or demand, produce or disclose less than all of the evidence or information within its knowledge and possession without depriving the defendant of due process of law.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 203 So. 2d 338 - State v. Wolfe