Bridenthal v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2016
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 101 So. 2d 373 - Mead v. State · 453 So. 2d 438 - Maguire 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n the separate appeals of the defendant’s codefendants, this court has issued an opinion reversing the codefen-dants’ convictions on the seven larceny counts on the ground that the larceny counts are barred by the statute of limitations. Maguire v. State, 453 So.2d 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). The statute of limitations is a jurisdictional issue and this court is not foreclosed from considering that issue notwithstanding that the issue was not raised at the trial or appellate level. Mead v. State, 101 So.2d 373 (Fla. 1958).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. State
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.