374 So. 2d 388 - Thompson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently April 2009 · most notably 730 So. 2d 652 - Ex Parte Woodall (1998), 397 So. 2d 577 - McCoy v. State (1981)
40 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 Sorrell v. State · Miller v. State · Slayton v. State · Slayton v. State · 343 So. 2d 542 - Kimmons 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A conviction of felony cannot be had on the testimony of an accomplice unless corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense, and such corroborative evidence, if it merely shows the commission of the offense or the circumstances thereof, is not sufficient.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Stephens v. State · Lynn v. State“'The court held that, first, the evidence of the accomplice must be eliminated, and then, if upon examination of all other evidence, there is sufficient incriminating evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense, there is sufficient corroboration. . .'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Stephens v. State · Steele v. State“"Speculation and suspicion will not support a conviction based on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, . . . but the weakness of the corroborating evidence, in and of itself does not preclude a finding that such evidence tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense. . . . Where such a finding is made, the weakness and inconclusiveness, vel non of the corroborating evidence is determined by the jury."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.