492 So. 2d 260 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently March 2013 · most notably Smith v. Black (1990), Brown v. State (2004)
2 federal appellate · 30 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 United States v. Agurs · Giglio v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · United States v. Thevis · 454 So. 2d 445 - Billiot 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“has been discovered since the trial, that it could not have been discovered before the trial by the exercise of due diligence, that it is material to the issue, and that it is not merely cumulative, or impeaching.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Moore v. State · Ellis v. State“If the defendant proves his allegations by clear and convincing proof, the Court must determine whether there is a probability that a different result would be reached if another jury heard the evidence. [emphasis in original]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Even if the petitioner is successful in proving his allegations regarding the newly discovered evidence, there still must be a determination concerning the `probative effect of such evidence to produce a different result on a new trial.' Of course, if newly discovered evidence will not probably produce a different result or induce a different verdict, it is not sufficient to warrant the granting of a new trial. But conversely, if, by legal standards, it will probably produce a different result or induce a different verdict, it is sufficient and should require a new trial. This is the true rule.”
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.