Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 389 So. 2d 48 - State v. Brown

389 So. 2d 48 - State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
4
states following
February 2021
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably 96 So. 3d 412 - State v. Adkins (2012), State v. White (1996)

35 state decisions

15019801990200020102020decided

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 Morissette v. United States · Dennis v. United States · United States v. Freed · State Ex Rel. Kemp v. City of Baton Rouge · Lambert v. Parish of Jefferson

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

  1. “and has afforded the rational basis for a tardy and unfinished substitution of deterrence and reformation in place of retaliation and vengeance as the motivation for public prosecution. Unqualified acceptance of this doctrine by English common law in the Eighteenth Century was indicated by Blackstone's sweeping statement that to constitute any crime there must first be a”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “As a general rule a party does not have standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute unless the application of that statute adversely affects him.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Although strict liability offenses do exist in the criminal law and do not in all instances offend constitutional requirements, these are limited in number and of a nature different from the statute being challenged here ... [T[he statute at issue here criminalizes unknowing possession. It requires little imagination to visualize a situation in which a third party hands the controlled substance to an unknowing individual who then can be charged with and subsequently convicted for violation ... without ever being aware of the nature of the substance he was given. A situation such as the above does indeed offend the conscious [sic].”
    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.