Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 339 So. 2d 755 - State v. Clift

339 So. 2d 755 - State v. Clift’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
1
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably State v. Haarala (1981), 418 So. 2d 515 - State v. Smith (1982)

1 federal appellate · 51 state decisions

20019761980199020002010decided

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 Chimel v. California · Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Weeks v. United States · United States v. Robinson · 302 So. 2d 869 - State v. Saia

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

  1. “... a mistrial shall be ordered when a remark or comment, made within the hearing of the jury by the judge, district attorney, or a court official, during the trial or in argument, refers directly or indirectly to ... another crime committed or alleged to have been committed as to which evidence is not admissible.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “In spite of the words in R.S. 40:966 that `it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally ...' to do the prohibited acts, the statute requires no more than general criminal intent.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “the two criminal acts were related and intertwined to such an extent that the state could not have accurately presented its case to the jury without reference to both of them.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.