403 So. 2d 1319 - Hall v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2015 · most notably 134 S. Ct. 1986 - Hall v. Florida (2014), 438 So. 2d 774 - Johnson v. State (1983)
2 federal appellate · 24 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 San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez · 351 So. 2d 972 - McArthur v. State · 90 So. 2d 629 - Davis v. State · Pope v. State · 267 So. 2d 647 - Foxworth 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The evidence of the defendants' homicidal intent is subject to conflicting interpretations. One is that Hall or Ruffin seized Coburn's gun intending to kill him, took aim, and fired. If this were true, then this killing was premeditated. There are other interpretations, one of which is that Coburn struggled with one or both of the defendants until either Hall or Ruffin pulled the trigger without intending to kill. If this were true, then the killing was not premeditated. ... While the circumstantial evidence in this case is inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence as to the homicide of Deputy Coburn, it is not inconsistent with any reasonable exculpatory hypothesis as to the existence of premediation. Therefore, the evidence is insufficient to prove premeditation, and the conviction for first-degree murder is reversed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“is not inconsistent with any reasonable exculpatory hypothesis as to the existence of premeditation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kirkland v. State
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.