Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 454 So. 2d 116 - State v. Jackson

454 So. 2d 116 - State v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably 622 So. 2d 198 - State v. Bourque (1993), 750 So. 2d 867 - State v. Hampton (1999)

46 state decisions

1701984199020002010decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Kotteakos v. United States · United States v. Hasting · 433 So. 2d 688 - State v. Smith · Carter v. Kentucky

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

  1. “"Art. 770. Prejudicial remarks; basis of mistrial Upon motion of a defendant, a mistrial shall be ordered when a remark or comment, made within the hearing of the jury by the judge, district attorney, or a court official, during the trial or in argument, refers directly or indirectly to: (1) Race, religion, color or national origin, if the remark or comment is not material and relevant and might create prejudice against the defendant in the mind of the jury; (2) Another crime committed or alleged to have been committed by the defendant as to which evidence is not admissible; (3) The failure of the defendant to testify in his own defense; or (4) The refusal of the judge to direct a verdict. An admonition to the jury to disregard the remark or comment shall not be sufficient to prevent a mistrial. If the defendant, however, requests that only an admonition be given, the court shall admonish the jury to disregard the remark or comment but shall not declare a mistrial."”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “A statement that the state's evidence is uncontradicted is not necessarily a prohibited comment on defendant's failure to testify.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “in cases where the prosecutor simply emphasized that the state's evidence was unrebutted, and there were witnesses other than the defendant who could have testified on behalf of the defense but did not do so, we have held that the prosecutor's argument did not constitute an indirect reference to the defendant's failure to take the stand.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.