Boyd v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently November 2016
1 federal appellate · 21 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 Hoffa v. United States · Krulewitch v. United States · Dennis v. United States · Barrett v. United States · Lombard v. Marcera
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[u]pon request of counsel, the court shall instruct the jury that the conspiracy itself and each member's participation in it must be established by independent evidence, either before the introduction of any evidence or before evidence is admitted under this paragraph.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[W]hen a conspiracy is established, everything said, written, or done by any of the conspirators in execution or furtherance of the common purpose is deemed to have been said, done, or written by every one of them and may be proved against each. Brown v. State, 128 Fla. 762 , 175 So. 515 (1937), clarified, 130 Fla. 479 , 178 So. 153 (1938). Accordingly, a hearsay (out-of-court) statement of a defendant’s alleged co-conspirator is admissible against the defendant if the statement was made during the pendency of the conspiracy and in furtherance of its objectives, provided that there is evidence of the conspiracy independent of the hearsay testimony. The requirement of independent evidence is a condition of admissibility. Briklod v. State, 365 So.2d 1023 (Fla.1978); Resnick v. State, 287 So.2d 24 (Fla.1973).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he instructions should contain a definition of conspiracy, an explanation of the legal consequences of proving a conspiracy in the case, and the admonition that it is for the jury to determine whether a conspiracy has been established beyond a reasonable doubt.”
2 later decisions 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.