511 So. 2d 225 - Nelson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably 695 So. 2d 70 - Bush v. State (1996), 570 So. 2d 703 - Newsome v. State (1990)
4 federal appellate · 55 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Gregg v. Georgia · Ake v. Oklahoma · Beck v. Alabama · Pulley v. Harris
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Relevancy to prove physical capacity, skill, or means to commit the now-charged crime; (2) part of the res gestae or part of a continuous transaction; (3) relevancy to prove scienter or guilty knowledge; (4) relevancy to prove criminal intent; (5) relevancy to prove plan, design, scheme, or system; (6) relevancy to prove motive; (7) relevancy to prove identity; (8) relevancy to rebut special defenses; and (9) relevancy in various particular crimes.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage“"[A] sudden transport of passion, caused by adequate provocation, if it suspends the exercise of judgment, and dominates volition, so as to exclude premeditation and a previously formed design, although it does not entirely dethrone reason, is sufficient to reduce the killing to manslaughter." (Emphasis added.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[M]ere allegations by counsel that the accused is incompetent to stand trial or was insane at the time of tilt commission of the offense do not establish reasonable grounds to doubt a defendant's sanity which would warrant an inquiry into his competency.”
3 later decisions 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.