Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 469 So. 2d 924 - Hutchens v. State

469 So. 2d 924 - Hutchens v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
November 2009
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently November 2009

6 state decisions

40198519902000decided

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 Kelly 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Even if, as the State suggests, a translation of the recording would reveal that the conversations thereon are totally admissible, we nonetheless must conclude that the potential of some members of the jury interpreting the otherwise incomprehensible testimony for other members of the jury is so fraught with the danger of prejudice that what is actually on the recording can serve only to exacerbate the prejudice." ( 469 So.2d at p. 925 .)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “without having such recording translated into English for the jurors by an interpreter sworn to give a faithful and accurate translation, despite the defendant's clear, but overruled, request that he do so.”
    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.