37 So. 3d 466 - State v. Hollier’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. “Possession of narcotic drugs can be established by actual physical possession or by constructive possession. A person can be found to be in constructive possession of a controlled substance if the State can establish that he had dominion and control over the contraband, even in the absence of physical possession. A determination of whether there is sufficient “possession” of a drug to convict depends on the particular facts of each case. Although mere presence in an area where drugs are located or mere association with one possessing drugs does not constitute constructive possession, this court has acknowledged several factors to be considered in determining whether a defendant exercised sufficient control and dominion to establish constructive possession, including: (1) his knowledge that drugs were in the area; (2) his relationship with the person, if any, found to be in actual possession; (3) his access to the area where the drugs were found; (4) evidence of recent drug consumption; and (5) his physical proximity to drugs.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Fobb · 85 So. 3d 821 - State v. Pittman

2. “Generally, a motion for new trial will be denied unless injustice has been done, no matter on what allegations it is grounded.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 248 So. 3d 360 - State v. Green