Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 419 So. 2d 262 - Mayberry v. State

419 So. 2d 262 - Mayberry v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
March 2003
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently March 2003

20 state decisions

100198219902000decided

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 Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · American Tobacco Company v. Emil Werckmeister · Mason v. State · Spicer v. State · Terry 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “such a concurrence of common features that the various acts are naturally to be explained as caused by a general plan of which they are the individual manifestations.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Allen v. State · Nail v. State
  2. “"Appellant argues that the State should have been estopped to indict him because he was induced to give incriminating grand jury testimony by the district attorney's promise not to prosecute him. Appellant claims the promise not to prosecute was implicit in the following pre-indictment statements made to him by the district attorney: `You [appellant] are either going to be a defendant or a witness.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 465 So. 2d 1196 - Agee v. State · 728 So. 2d 657 - State v. Sealy
  3. “the construction [of a statute] should not defeat the obvious intent of the legislature, [citation omitted] or destroy the spirit and force of the law the legislature intended to enact.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 516 So. 2d 775 - Darby v. State · 710 So. 2d 507 - JSH 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.