Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 268 So. 2d 173 - Pope v. State

268 So. 2d 173 - Pope v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
2
states following
November 2011
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently November 2011 · most notably 357 So. 2d 410 - McNamara v. State (1978), Wilson v. State (1975)

50 state decisions

27019721980199020002010decided

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 Dennis v. California · 225 So. 2d 548 - State v. Evans · 113 So. 2d 383 - State Ex Rel. Shargaa v. Culver · 229 So. 2d 261 - Evans v. State · McLean 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"[D]id unlawfully possess and have in his control a certain drug, to-wit: cannabis sativa, commonly known as marijuana, a more particular description of which is to the State Attorney unknown; ..." [7]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[p]roper jurisdictional allegations are as essential in an accusatory writ as are those relating to the material elements of the crime.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “We have carefully examined the briefs and the record in the case and have heard oral argument by the parties. We conclude that the Petitioner is correct in his argument (1) that the information was insufficient to charge a felony since it failed to allege (a) that he had been previously convicted of a violation of the Drug Abuse Law, or (b) that the delivery was for consideration, or (c) that the amount of marijuana delivered exceeded five grams; and (2) that under these circumstances, the case should be remanded for sentencing under the misdemeanor provision of the Statute.”
    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.