Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 217 SO2D 326 - State v. Galasso

State v. Galasso’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
March 1995
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1995 · most notably Harris v. New York (1971), 44 Cal. 3d 309 - People v. May (1988)

1 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

2001968197019801990decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Weeks v. United States · Walder v. United States · State v. Jackson · Groshart v. United States

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

  1. “"The ruling in the Miranda decision to the effect that it is impermissible to penalize an individual who while in police custody exercises his privilege against self-incrimination by remaining silent, prohibits the admission of testimony relating to the silence of a defendant during the investigatory stages of a criminal case, even though the defendant later chooses to take the stand at the trial and testify in his own behalf, cf. Jones v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 200 So.2d 574, 576 . To permit the use of such testimony would penalize the defendant for having remained silent at the investigatory stage because evidence of such silence tends to derogate his testimony at trial and also implies guilt."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Although the District Court correctly adopted the proper rule of law we nevertheless reach a different result than it did in our disposition of this cause. Admittedly the admission of the testimony of Mr. Brumley was error but the issues remain, was it such an error as to require reversal or was it, in fact, harmless error. * * *"”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"... on its face the decision of the District Court of Appeal is clearly and admittedly in direct conflict on the same point of law with the decision of this Court in State v. Hines. For additional conflict see also Jones v. State, 200 So.2d 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)." State v. Galasso, supra, at p. 328.”
    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.