Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 319 So. 2d 14 - Smith v. State

319 So. 2d 14 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
3
states following
June 2006
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently June 2006

13 state decisions

701975198019902000decided

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 Neil v. Biggers · Williams v. Florida · United States v. Ash · Wardius v. Oregon · Baldwin v. New York Williams

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

  1. “[T]he notice-of-alibi rule was never intended to provide a defendant with a procedural device to escape justice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The point is that if, during the course of the proceedings, it is brought to the attention of the trial court that the state has failed to comply with Rule 1.220(e) CrPR, the court's discretion can be properly exercised only after the court has made an adequate inquiry into all of the surrounding circumstances. Without intending to limit the nature or scope of such inquiry, we think it would undoubtedly cover at least such questions as whether the state's violation was inadvertent or wilful, whether the violation was trivial or substantial, and most importantly, what effect, if any, did it have upon the ability of the defendant to properly prepare for trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"Rule 3.200, RCrP is a part of the general discovery rules incorporated into the criminal procedure of this state. Like all discovery, it is reciprocal, affording the state and defendant alike an opportunity to eliminate surprise and lessens the opportunity for manufactured false alibis. Like all discovery procedures, fairness is the watchword.... The rule mandates that each party is under a continuing duty to disclose the names and addresses of additional witnesses... ."”
    1 later decision 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.