Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 247 SO2D 342 - State v. Jones

State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
December 2006
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 2006

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

701971198019902000decided

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 · 1 Cal. 3d 847 - Eleazer v. Superior Court · Velarde-Villarreal v. United States · 220 F. Supp. 905 - United States v. Clarke · 177 So. 2d 723 - Warriner v. Ferraro

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

  1. “... duty of the State to disclose a material witness informer's identity on pain of dismissal ...”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"the duty of the State to disclose a material witness informer's identity on pain of dismissal imposed by Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 [ 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed.2d 639 ], 1957; Matthews v. State [Fla. 1950], 44 So.2d 664 , and Monserrate v. State [Fla.App. 1970], 232 So.2d 444 , contemplates an "identity" that includes all pertinent information helpful in locating the witnesses. The Court specifically rejects the view that the State has fulfilled its obligation in this regard when it reveals all that it knows, if what it has arranged to know is inadequate for location purposes."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “knew or should have known that the said witnesses possessed firsthand information material to the charges contained in the Information and would, therefore, be material witnesses for either the State or the defendant.”
    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.