State v. Florine’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 111 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 115 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably Dawkins v. State (1988), State v. Bradshaw (2004)
4 federal appellate · 111 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 State v. Wiley · State v. LaBarre · State v. Resnick
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 115 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) that the police found the substance in a place under defendant’s exclusive control to which other people did not normally have access, or (b) that, if police found it in a place to which others had access, there is a strong probability (inferable from other evidence) that defendant was at the time consciously exercising dominion and control over it.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Flowers · State v. Royster“to include within the possession statute those cases where the state cannot prove actual or physical possession at the time of arrest but where the inference is strong that the defendant at one time physically possessed the substance and did not abandon his possessory interest in the substance but rather continued to exercise dominion and control over it up to the time of the arrest.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lee v. State · State v. Cusick“[I]n order to convict a defendant of unlawful possession of a controlled substance, the state must prove that defendant consciously possessed, either physically or constructively, the substance and that defendant had actual knowledge of the nature of the substance.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Williams · State v. Lewis
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.