329 So. 2d 283 - Hamilton v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 2005
3 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 Leary v. United States · Tot v. United States · Barnes v. United States · United States v. Gainey · United States v. Romano
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Criminal acts declaring one fact prima facie evidence or presumption of another are frequent. Their purpose is not to relieve the State of the burden of proof, but to allow the establishment of a prima facie case. Constitutional guarantees are not violated as long as there is a rational connection between the fact proven and the ultimate fact presumed and reasonable opportunity is afforded to rebut the presumption.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“upon demand for payment being made, and there being no dispute as to the amount owed, failure to make payment shall constitute prima facie evidence of 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.