Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 380 SO2D 246 - Nettles v. State

Nettles v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
November 2005
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently November 2005

7 state decisions

40198019902000decided

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 Kentucky v. Whorton · 308 So. 2d 71 - Newell v. State · United States v. Barnes · United States v. Garcia · Upham v. United States

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.

  1. “[S]uch a failure must be evaluated in light of the totality of the circumstances-including all the instructions to the jury, the arguments of counsel, whether the weight of the evidence was overwhelming, and other related factors....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We acknowledge that real differences arise between litigants and their attorneys, but are of the view that such differences appearing at the last minute. . . must necessarily be examined for good faith or efforts thereby to procure a continuance. Although the defendant gave expression to his unhappiness with his employed trial attorney, thereafter excellent cooperation between them appeared, and in disposing of post-conviction matters, the judge commented complimentarily upon the attorney's services and the appellant's cooperation with him.”
    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.