Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 335 So. 2d 280 - Fulton v. State

335 So. 2d 280 - Fulton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

88
cited by 88 later decisions
6
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 87 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably 511 So. 2d 526 - Rogers v. State (1987), 608 So. 2d 784 - Fotopoulos v. State (1992)

1 federal appellate · 87 state decisions

33019761980199020002010decided

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 Alford v. United States · Michelson v. United States · 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State · Board of Education v. Mapp · Wallace 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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"However, it is clear that if a witness for the State were presently or recently under actual or threatened criminal charges or investigation leading to such criminal charges, a person against whom such witness testifies in a criminal case has an absolute right to bring those circumstances out on cross-examination or otherwise so that the jury will be fully apprised as to the witness' possible motive of self-interest with respect to the testimony he gives. Testimony given in a criminal case by a witness who himself is under actual or threatened criminal investigation or charges may well be biased in favor of the State without the knowledge of such bias by the police or prosecutor because the witness may seek to curry their favor with respect to his own legal difficulties by furnishing biased testimony favorable to the State."”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “evidence of particular acts of misconduct cannot be introduced to impeach the credibility of a witness.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “If the witness denies ever having been convicted, or misstates the number of previous convictions, counsel may impeach the witness by producing a record of past convictions. Even if a witness denies a prior conviction, the specific offense is identified only incidentally when the record of the conviction is entered into evidence.”
    2 later decisions 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.