206 So. 3d 1143 - State v. Washburn’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 2018
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Old Chief v. United States · Moore v. Blackburn, Warden · 474 So. 2d 919 - State v. Jones · 433 So. 2d 110 - State v. Germain
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A. Illegal possession of stolen things is the intentional possessing, procuring, receiving, or concealing of anything of value which has been the subject of any robbery or theft, under circumstances which indicate that the offender knew or had good reason to believe that the thing was the subject of one of these offenses. B. (1) Whoever commits the crime of illegal possession of stolen things, when the value of the things is twenty-five thousand dollars or more, shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not more than twenty years, or may be fined not more than fifty thousand dollars, or both. (2) When the value of the stolen things is five thousand dollars or more, but less than a value of twenty-five thousand dollars, the offender shall be imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than ten years, or may be fined not more than ten thousand dollars, or both. (3) When the value of the stolen things is one thousand dollars or more, but less than a value of five thousand dollars, the offender shall be imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than five years, or may be fined not more than three thousand dollars, or both. (4) When the value of the stolen things is less than one thousand dollars, the offender shall be imprisoned for not more than six months or may be fined not more than one thousand dollars, or both. If the offender in such cases has been convicted of theft two or more times previously, upon any subsequent conviction, he shall be imprisoned, with ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“and that he had not seen Mr. Sweet in the intervening years, save for a chance encounter at Walmart a couple of years ago. The trial court did not reexamine Mr. Sweet. Upon hearing this testimony, the trial court allowed Mr. Sweet to remain on the jury, finding that”
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.