Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 So. 3d 534 - Nelson v. State

32 So. 3d 534 - Nelson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
March 2013
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 895 So. 2d 836 - Bush v. State · 459 So. 2d 793 - Fairchild v. State · 737 So. 2d 424 - Ford v. State · 485 So. 2d 1055 - Davis v. State · 759 So. 2d 495 - Echols 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “in order to sustain a conviction of uttering a forgery, the State must have proved beyond a reasonable doubt (1) that the defendant published or uttered as true (2) a forged, altered or counterfeit instrument, (3) knowing the instrument to be forged, altered or counterfeited, (4) with intent to defraud.”
    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.