369 So. 2d 1049 - State v. Andrews’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently October 2008 · most notably State v. Prestridge (1981), 543 So. 2d 886 - State v. Lindsey (1989)
1 federal appellate · 31 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 McArthur Et Al. v. Clifford, Secretary of Defense, Et Al. · 360 So. 2d 500 - State v. Drew · State v. Matthews · United States v. Goodwin · State v. Bickham
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the circumstances indicate that because of a mental disease or mental defect the offender was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong with reference to the conduct in question, the offender shall be exempt from criminal responsibility.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Roy · State v. Lee“"Maps or diagrams generally are admissible to aid the jury in understanding testimony if shown to be an accurate representation of the subject matter in question and the ruling of the trial court relative to admissibility will not be disturbed on appeal unless there has been abuse of discretion. 3 Wharton's Criminal Evidence, § 641 (13th ed. Torcia, 1973). See also United States v. Goodwin, 470 F.2d 893 (5 CA 1972). In State v. Triplett, 285 So.2d 532 (La.1973), where the arresting officer had returned to the scene and drawn a sketch, this court held that admission of the sketch at trial was not an error. In so concluding, this court noted that the fact that the sketch was not absolutely accurate in every detail and distance did not negate its relevancy or render it inadmissible, but rather would go to the weight accorded the sketch by the jury."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Simpson · State v. Toomer“"Medical experts are expected to rely in part on tests and examinations performed by others in arriving at their opinions and this reliance does not render their opinions inadmissible hearsay. State v. Nicolaus, 340 So.2d 296 (La. 1976); State v. Vincent, 338 So.2d 1376 (La.1976). Although the expert witness in the present case is a psychologist, rather than a physician, these rules apply equally to him when he is testifying in the area in which he has special training and experience. See R.S. 15:464."”
3 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.