336 So. 2d 817 - State v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably 559 So. 2d 1321 - State v. Wille (1990), 339 So. 2d 764 - State v. May (1976)
30 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 Barber v. Page · 54 Cal. 2d 621 - People v. Gould · 322 So. 2d 189 - State v. Butler · 304 So. 2d 300 - State v. Kaufman · State v. Flood
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an assertive communication introduced for the truth of the assertion thereby made.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * while some jurisdictions still hold that testimony as to an out-of-court visual identification made by another in the witness's presence is inadmissible hearsay under almost all circumstances, by far the greater number of jurisdictions now permit admission of such testimony, at least when offered in corroboration of direct testimony of a trial witness which identifies the accused. See: Annotation, Admissibility of Evidence as to Extrajudicial Identification, 71 ALR2d 449 (1960), and especially Later Case Service (through 1976); 1 Wharton's Criminal Evidence, Section 187 (13th ed., Torcia, ed.; 1972).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Jacobs“As noted in McCormick on Evidence, Section 251, p. 603 (2d ed., 1972): `When A testifies that on a prior occasion B pointed to the accused and said, "That's the man who robbed me," the testimony is clearly hearsay. If, however, B is present in court and available for cross-examination, a case within the present section is presented. Similarly if B has himself testified to the prior identification...'" 336 So.2d at 822 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Vaughn
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.