257 So. 2d 884 - In Re Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently July 2018
1 federal appellate · 8 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 In Re Camden County Grand Jury · People v. McCabe · Ex Parte Robinson · 93 So. 2d 99 - State Ex Rel. Brautigam v. Interim Report of Grand Jury · State v. Bramlett
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““While a grand jury may present any person for indictment, if evidence sufficient to justify an indictment is not introduced in the ex parte proceeding, its power over the matter or offense investigated is terminated unless it falls within one of the four addenda enacted by the legislature in expanding the constitutional powers of a grand jury. It is obvious that the report here was not limited to the grand jury function of indictment or presentment nor was it within the legisla tive enactments. The grand jury’s report was in excess of that body’s lawful authority. The caustic comments found therein were, therefore, a trespass upon the rights of the appellant even though he be a public official. “The statement of a grand jury demands respect within a community and its deliberations and conclusions are tantamount to fact in the eyes of the populace. Our judicial system is couched in due process and fairness. Conviction by innuendo resulting from an ex parte proceeding is not compatible with and is extremely offensive to these basic principles of jurisprudence.” 257 So.2d at 887-88 . (Emphasis added).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“is a written accusation prepared by the public prosecutor and presented before the grand jury who examines the evidence in support of it... . In finding an indictment the grand jury is similar to a trial except that it only hears one side of the case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““All public officers, for wilful neglect of duty or misdemeanor in office, shall be ’liable to presentment or indictment by a grand jury; . . .” (Emphasis added).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Petition of Williams · In re Moore
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.