371 So. 2d 714 - Perez v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 2018
19 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 313 So. 2d 666 - Simkins Industries, Inc. v. Moreira · Leavine v. State · Pickeron v. State of Florida · Zenchak v. Ryder Truck Rentals, Inc. · McCutchen 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““we take this opportunity to caution trial courts to guard against allowing the jury to hear prior consistent statements which are not properly admissible. Particular care must be taken to avoid such testimony by law enforcement officers. As noted by the district courts: ‘The rationale prohibiting the use of pri- or consistent statements is to prevent ‘putting a cloak of credibility’ on the witness’s testimony. When a police officer, who is generally regarded by the jury as disinterested and objective and therefore highly credible, is the corroborating witness, the danger of improperly influencing the jury becomes particularly grave.’ ””
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Barnes v. State · Davis 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.