Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 425 SO2D 1126 - Trushin v. State

Trushin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
1
states following
April 2023
most recently cited

76 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably 76 So. 3d 991 - Maestas v. State (2011), 616 So. 2d 1 - State v. Johnson (1993)

76 state decisions

27019821990200020102020decided

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 Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Brown v. Hartlage · Clark v. State · 237 So. 2d 134 - Sanford v. Rubin · 394 So. 2d 979 - Bell 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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he constitutional application of a statute to a particular set of facts is another matter and must be raised at the trial level.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a conviction for the violation of a facially invalid statute would constitute fundamental error.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “When, as here, a state regulates conduct as well as speech, the applicable test for overbreadth is stated in Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 615 , 93 S.Ct. 2908, 2917 , 37 L.Ed.2d 830 (1973): "where conduct and not merely speech is involved, we believe that the overbreadth of a statute must not only be real, but substantial as well, judged in relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep."”
    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.