278 So. 2d 781 - State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 105 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 625 So. 2d 146 - State v. Jackson (1993), 412 So. 2d 507 - State v. Humphrey (1982)
1 federal appellate · 105 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 277 So. 2d 126 - State v. Prieur · State v. Cupit · State v. Crook · State v. Spencer · State v. Johnson
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 107 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In order to show intent, evidence is admissible of similar acts, independent of the act charged as a crime in the indictment, for though intent is a question of fact, it need not be proven as a fact, it may be inferred from the circumstances of the transaction.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[m]atters which are logically relevant to issues before the jury should not be excluded merely because they show the accused has committed other offenses.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Sex cases call for special treatment with respect to the admission of evidence of other offenses. They are subject to the same exceptions that non-sex criminal trials are subject to,1 and in addition they are often subject to a special rule relative to the defendant's propensity to commit the crime on trial. "Some courts depart sharply from the general rule which bars the use of other offenses to prove the defendant's propensity or disposition2 and permit the introduction in sex cases of evidence of other sex offenses in order to show the defendant's propensity, inclination or disposition toward sex in general, that is, without regard to whether the defendant's victim or partner was the same person.3 Other courts refuse evidence of other sex offenses which involve different victims or partners,4 but nearly all courts permit evidence of other sex offenses which involve the same person as the offense on trial, the theory being that the evidence shows the defendant's lustful attitude toward that person. 5 In any event, courts in sex cases are probably more liberal than they are in other cases in admitting evidence of other offenses.6 "In the trial of sex offenses the evidence of other sex offenses is not limited to those occurring before the offense on trial,7 but remoteness, as always, is an important consideration.8" (Footnotes omitted) (Emphasis ours)”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.