Pearson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 1991
13 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 Roviaro v. United States · 179 So. 2d 873 - Spataro v. State · Rodriguez v. United States · 194 So. 2d 250 - Westberry v. Daves Auto Parts · 172 So. 2d 628 - Koptyra 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(e) ENTRAPMENT "One of the defenses asserted in this case is that the defendant was a victim of what is known as entrapment. "One who, for the purpose of prosecution, is persuaded, induced or lured by an officer of the law or someone acting for him, into the commission of a crime which he had otherwise no intention to commit, may avail himself of the defense of entrapment and should not be convicted. However, that defense is not available if the officer acted in good faith for the purpose of detecting crime and merely furnished an opportunity for commission thereof by one who already had the intent to commit the crime. "It is no defense to the perpetrator of a crime that facilities for its commission were purposely placed in his way, or that he was decoyed or solicited by persons seeking to expose the criminal, or that law enforcement officers pretending participation in the act were present and apparently assisting in its commission. "The state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not the victim of entrapment by law enforcement officers, and unless it has done so you should find the defendant not guilty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The State is privileged to withhold, notwithstanding its relevance, the identity of persons who furnish information or otherwise aid officers in matters relating to violations of law, and such privilege is founded upon public policy and in furtherance of the public interest. State v. Hardy, Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 344 ; Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 709 ; Harrington v. State, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 495 ; Ferrara v. State, Fla.1958, 101 So.2d 797 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Thennes
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.