Barket v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
May 1979
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 280 So. 2d 431 - Hoffman v. Jones · 287 So. 2d 73 - State v. Bryan · 238 So. 2d 618 - State v. Graham · Escambia County Electric Light & Power Co. v. Sutherland · Franklin 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is not necessary for the state to prove that the defendant knew beyond a reasonable doubt that the property had been stolen. It is sufficient if the circumstances of the transaction were so suspicious as to put a person of ordinary intelligence and caution upon inquiry and, nevertheless, the defendant did buy it, receive it or aid in concealing it.” This instruction has been amended to reflect changes to former § 811.16, Fla.Stat. (1973), which now appear in § 812.031, Fla.Stat. (1975).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Barket v. State
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.