471 So. 2d 9 - Bundy v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 96 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018 · most notably Rock v. Arkansas (1987), State v. Johnston (1988)
2 federal appellate · 96 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Blockburger v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Irvin v. Dowd
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is sufficient if the juror can lay aside his opinion or impression and render a verdict based on the evidence presented in court.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he cases in which flight evidence has been held inadmissible have contained particular facts which tend to detract from the probative value of such evidence. For instance, the probative value of flight evidence is weakened: 1) if the suspect was unaware at the time of the flight that he was the subject of a criminal investigation for the particular crime charged; 2) where there were not clear indications that the defendant had in fact fled; or, 3) where there was a significant time'delay from the commission of the crime to the time of flight. The interpretation to be gleaned from an act of flight should be made with a sensitivity to the facts of the particular case.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“hypnotically refreshed testimony is per se inadmissible in a criminal trial in this state, but hypnosis does not render a witness incompetent to testify to those facts demonstrably recalled prior to hypnosis.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Morgan v. State · Bundy v. Florida
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.