451 So. 2d 375 - Ringstaff v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2006
4 federal appellate · 5 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Barker v. Wingo · Beck v. Alabama · Smith v. Hooey · Dillingham v. United States
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We are of the opinion that it was in the interest of justice according to law, the guiding star of judicial proceedings, that the trial court, the parties and all others concerned with this case, handled it with commendable caution and circumspection rather than rushing ahead without chart or compass to guide them.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ringstaff v. Howard
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.