Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 22 SO3D 382 - Hooks v. State

Hooks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2012
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 691 So. 2d 918 - Collins v. State · Lang v. State · 975 So. 2d 219 - Callins v. State · 742 So. 2d 1140 - Daniels v. State · 986 So. 2d 928 - Moore 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “We find that the court was correct in finding that the two affidavits presented by Hooks do not constitute newly-discovered evidence. The law is clear in this state that “neither consent nor ‘mistake of age’ is a defense to capital or statutory rape.” In order to support the overturning of a conviction, newly-discovered evidence must be “of such nature that [it] would be practically conclusive that it would cause a different result.” Therefore, even if the affidavits were new evidence, they would not constitute newly-discovered evidence sufficient to cause a different result in Hooks’s conviction. Hooks’s contentions that the affidavits constitute newly-discovered evidence are wholly without merit.”
    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.