Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 346 SO2D 682 - State v. Lee

State v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
2
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

48 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably 543 So. 2d 886 - State v. Lindsey (1989), 530 So. 2d 526 - State v. Copeland (1988)

48 state decisions

24019771980199020002010decided

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 United States v. Grunberger · United States v. Briggs · Burley v. Louisiana Power & Light Co. · 320 So. 2d 195 - State v. Marcell · 339 So. 2d 829 - State v. Smith

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

  1. “[a]n irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"`... [O]ne must recognize that the closing argument of the prosecutor may be so permeated with improprieties that constant objections may alienate the jurors or underscore the remark rather than erase it from their minds. Therefore, an objection at the end of the summation should be considered timely and in some cases should be allowed outside the presence of the jury.' [citations omitted] 34 L.L.Rev. 746, 759 (1974)."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “intended to promote judicial efficiency and to insure fair play.”
    4 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.