Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 437 So. 2d 702 - Watson v. State

437 So. 2d 702 - Watson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
February 2001
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently February 2001

13 state decisions

100198319902000decided

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 Purcell v. Deli Man, Inc. · Inanc v. Schreckengost · 358 So. 2d 10 - Alvarez v. State · 143 So. 2d 817 - Goswick v. State · State v. Johnston

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In our view, the legislature's inclusion of the frame or receiver of a weapon and of mufflers and silencers within the definition of a firearm indicates that the legislature did not intend to require a finding that an operable handgun be involved in order to sustain a conviction of robbery with a firearm. While it is not entirely clear, it appears that the legislature, like the Bass court, was concerned about the perception of the victim in determining whether the weapon used should be classified as a firearm. We must apply the legislature's definition. Here, the jury could have concluded that this weapon could be "readily converted" to expel a projectile. Similarly, the jury could have concluded that this weapon was "designed" to expel a projectile. Either of those conclusions would be sufficient to meet the definition of firearm established by the legislature. In any case, we believe the evidence was sufficient to support the implicit finding of the jury that the weapon carried by Watson was a firearm. [1]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the state need only have proved that the weapon in Mrs. Bentley's possession was designed to or could be readily converted to expel a projectile.”
    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.