416 So. 2d 650 - Gentry v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently March 2014
17 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 337 So. 2d 1242 - Jackson v. State · State v. Johnson · Jones v. State · 254 So. 2d 750 - Rhone v. State · Thompson 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is well established in this state that the corpus delicti in a homicide case is made up of two fundamental facts, the first being the death of the deceased and the second the fact of the existence of a criminal agency as to the cause of death, (citation omitted) Thus, in a prosecution for premeditated murder the state is not required to prove independently those mental elements if the defendant had made a confession that admitted them. It follows that independent proof of the felony in a felony-murder prosecution is not necessary if the proof of the felony can be gathered from the confession. In this case the state satisfied the burden upon it by proving the death and that it resulted from a criminal agency. Appellant confessed that he killed the deceased while committing armed robbery.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hart v. State“Appellant first assigns as error his arraignment during vacation over his objection. He contends his conviction and sentence should be set aside so that he might be properly arraigned during a court term and retried. Assuming, arguendo, arraignment was improperly held during vacation, the appellant has not demonstrated wherein he was prejudiced in any manner by being arraigned in vacation on a day designated by the court for arraignments and motions. ( 416 So.2d at 651 )”
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.