Woodside v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently November 1993
21 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 204 So. 2d 515 - State v. Jones · 140 So. 2d 627 - Jackman v. State · Gray v. State · Clinton v. State · Reddick 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"MR. MASIN: That was my remark, Your Honor, what the Court will instruct. "The Court will instruct you that whoever aids, abets and et cetera is responsible the same as the perpetrator, as the principal. All participants are equally responsible. The fact Mr. Carr and the other defense attorneys have not seen fit to ask the witness Manning, who held her legs, if he knew, who pointed the gun, who held her throat at various times, does not make any of these defendants less responsible. If they thought they could show a mistake or an error on any individual identification, you know they would have brought it out from the witness stand. "The State has the burden of proving their guilt by competent evidence. We did this. We put the man on who went through this, the man who identified them. This is our burden, and it is up to the defense, if they can, to rebut that. "Mr. Carr will tell you, and it is the law * * * "MR. GOLD: If it please he court, it is not the duty of the defense to rebut anything. I object to the remark." "THE COURT: Sustained. "MR. GOLD: I will move for a mistrial on those grounds. "THE COURT: Denied. "MR. MASIN: Mr. Carr, in all probability, if the other attorneys do not, will tell you, as you were told when you were selected, the defense does not have to prove anything. That is correct. They do not have to prove a thing, but if they could prove something in cross-examining the * * * "MR. GOLD: I object. "MR. MASIN: [Continuing] * * * State's witness * * *"”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parks v. State“"Where two or more persons are charged in the same count of an indictment, such as the indictment of these defendants, as principals in the first degree with the commission of a felony, such as that charged, it is permissible to show under such charge that one or more defendants actually committed the felony and that another or others were present aiding and abetting in the commission thereof and all may be convicted under such charge and proof. Therefore, if you find from the evidence that one or more of these defendants raped M---- S---- B---- and the other defendants were present aiding and abetting the said defendant or defendants in the commission of such crime, then you may find such defendant or defendants guilty of the same felonious crime, if any as that committed by such defendant as may have been so aided and abetted. "The words aid and abet include all assistance rendered by acts, words, encouragement, support or presence, actual or constructive."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parks v. State“As was noted in State v. Jones, supra, analysis of the prosecutor's comments to the jury must depend upon the circumstances of each particular case. We find that the comments complained of in the instant case, taken in full context and in light of the surrounding circumstances, constitute nothing more than an observation that the testimony of the state's witness was unshaken by cross-examination. The prosecuting attorney did not comment”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parks 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.