Anderson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “If the jury had followed the statute, and was required to choose, it might well have returned a verdict only on the theft charge. The failure to charge the jury on this statute thus puts a defendant at a disadvantage. We need a standard jury instruction to implement the statute, perhaps because ... “the vast majority of criminal defense attorneys are oblivious” to section 812.025.... I respectfully suggest that our committee on standard jury instructions in criminal cases consider an instruction based on section 812.025.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 121 So. 3d 535 - Blackmon v. State · Kiss v. State

2. “Therefore, Hall and a plain reading of the statute make it clear that the state was not entitled to have a jury convict Aversano of both counts and then have the trial court adjudicate her guilty of grand theft.... The statute does not permit this option. To conclude otherwise would make the language of the statute, which permits the trier of fact to return a verdict on one or the other but not both, meaningless.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 121 So. 3d 535 - Blackmon v. State