Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 436 SO2D 1085 - Jackson v. State

Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
January 2009
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 2009

5 state decisions

30198319902000decided

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 Gernat v. Gernat · The Florida Bar v. Jameison · Cooper v. State · J. H. v. State · 381 So. 2d 1199 - Pack 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Evidence that (a) the victim of a purse snatching, committed by a person other than the defendant, saw Jackson [defendant] emerging from an automobile which the victim had followed from the vicinity of the scene of the robbery; (b) the spoils of the robbery were found in the automobile occupied by Jackson and the perpetrator of the robbery; and (c) Jackson fled from the scene of the robbery; even if arguably supporting inferences that Jackson had driven the perpetrator to and from the scene and had after-the-fact knowledge of the robbery, is insufficient to prove that Jackson knew beforehand of his companion’s intentions, much less that he had a prior intention to participate in the offense, and manifestly does not support Jackson’s conviction for aiding and abetting in the commission of the robbery.” (Emphasis added at P. 1086)”
    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.