378 So. 2d 411 - State v. Roubion’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 2017
7 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 Huff v. Commonwealth · State v. Higgins · Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority v. Zitko · 136 Ga. App. 122 - State v. Barnett · 363 So. 2d 486 - State v. Case
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Several state courts have held that, in the absence of a statute or rule to the contrary, an affiant’s signature is not essential, if he is sworn in the presence of the magistrate and is sufficiently identified in the body of the affidavit or in the jurat. Huff v. Commonwealth, 213 Va. 710 , 194 S.E.2d 690 (1973); State v. Higgins, 266 N.C. 589 , 146 S.E.2d 681 (1966); see 3 Am.Jur.2d Affidavits, § 15 (1962); 2A C.J.S. Affidavits § 36 (1972); but see contra: Land Clearance for Redevelopment Auth. v. Zitko, 386 S.W.2d 69 (Mo.1965); State v. Barnett, 136 Ga.App. 122 , 220 S.E.2d 730 (1975).””
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.