State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
94 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 94 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably State v. Howard (1999), 636 So. 2d 1069 - State v. Soler (1994)
94 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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · United States v. Atkinson · Cole v. State of Arkansas · 419 So. 2d 858 - State v. Raymo · 385 So. 2d 248 - State v. Byrd
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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This court has not created or recognized a plain error rule of general application.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Gardner · State v. Brown“[a]n irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Potter · State v. Francis“The contemporaneous objection rule has two purposes: (1) to put the trial judge on notice of the alleged irregularity so that he may cure the problem and (2) to prevent a defendant from gambling for a favorable verdict and then resorting to appeal on errors that might easily have been corrected by objection.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Dossman · State v. Potter
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.