236 So. 2d 166 - State v. Matney’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently July 1996 · most notably 350 So. 2d 1 - State v. Hassberger (1977), 534 So. 2d 864 - State v. Zamora (1988)
24 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 Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · Jones v. United States · United States v. Ventresca · Roviaro 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Where the disclosure of an informer's identity, or of the contents of his communication, [1] is relevant and helpful to the defense of an accused, or [2] is essential to a fair determination of a cause, the privilege must give way. ... . We believe that no fixed rule with respect to disclosure is justifiable. The problem is one that calls for balancing the public interest in protecting the flow of information against the individual's right to prepare his defense. Whether a proper balance renders nondisclosure erroneous must depend on the particular circumstances of each case, taking into consideration the crime charged, the possible defenses, the possible significance of the informer's testimony, and other relevant factors."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“1) "whether it was necessary for the prosecutor to refer to the informer in the presentation of the case, or whether the informer's existence was first brought out on cross-examination by the defendant; 2) "whether the informer was an `active participant' in the offense with which the defendant is charged or is a `mere informer' who supplies a `lead'; 3) "whether the accused admits or does not deny guilt; 4) "and whether there is independent evidence of the accused's guilt." Id. at 252 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Woods v. State“"Where disclosure of an informer's identity is relevant and helpful to the defense of an accused, or is essential to a fair determination of the cause, the privilege must give way. State v. Matney, 236 So.2d 166 (Fla.1st DCA 1970); Rovario v. United States, 353 U.S. 53, 60-61 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed.2d 639 (1957)." Id. at 2.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Woods 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.