36 So. 3d 848 - Singh v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
24 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 997 So. 2d 403 - In Re Standard Instruct. in Cr. Cases No. 2007-10 · Nieves v. State · 433 So. 2d 1325 - Borders v. State · 831 So. 2d 235 - Hankerson v. State · 739 So. 2d 1177 - Nelson 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although the jury found, by its second-degree murder verdict, that Appellant did not intend to kill the victim, based on the instructions given, it could have returned a verdict for the lesser-included offense of manslaughter by culpable negligence while still honoring its finding that there was no intent to kill. Unlike in Montgomery , the jury in the instant case was not directed to choose the greater offense simply because the lesser-included offense would have improperly required a more depraved level of intent. Therefore, Appellant has not shown that fundamental error occurred under this Court’s opinion in Montgomery .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“unlike Montgomery and Zeigler [v. State, 18 So.3d 1239, 1242 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)], the jury in Nieves' case was also instructed on the lesser-included offense of manslaughter by culpable negligence.”
1 later decision 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.