403 So. 2d 982 - Wilson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2018
1 federal appellate · 11 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 Collins v. State · 370 So. 2d 1195 - State v. Shipman · State v. Chapman · Parker 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We view the new rule as directory and not mandatory, but we wish to call it to the attention of the Bar and Bench and encourage conformance to it so that reversal of judgment and sentence upon an allegation of error in closing argument will not be required by the unavailability of a record to review. A recorded argument need not be transcribed except on request; but if it is requested, then it will be available and review may be had.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(a) When Reporting Required. All criminal and juvenile proceedings, and any other judicial proceedings required by law or court rule to be reported at public expense, shall be reported. Any proceeding shall be reported on the request of any party. (b) Record. When trial proceedings are being reported, no part of the proceedings shall be omitted unless all of the parties agree to do so and the court approves the agreement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is lawful under this chapter for a law enforcement officer or a person acting under the direction of a law enforcement officer to intercept a wire or oral communication when such person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception and the purpose of such interception is to obtain evidence of a criminal act.”
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.