Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 520 SO2D 32 - Florida Freedom Newspapers v. McCrary

Florida Freedom Newspapers v. McCrary’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
5
states following
May 2017
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently May 2017

22 state decisions

1401988199020002010decided

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 Sheppard v. Maxwell · Branzburg v. Hayes · Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart · Estes v. Texas · Near v. State of Minnesota Olson

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

  1. “If, as the press urges, chapter 119 was read and applied so as to violate the constitutional separation of powers doctrine or the right to a fair trial, we would be obliged to declare the statute unconstitutional. Instead, we hold that when correctly interpreted and applied there is no conflict between the statute and the constitutional authority of the judicial branch to take such measures as are necessary to obtain orderly proceedings and a fair trial. * * * * * * In summary, there is no first amendment right of access to pretrial discovery material. There is in Florida a statutory right of access to such material when it becomes a public record, but that statutory right must be balanced against the constitutional rights of a fair trial and due process.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “There is no constitutional impediment to a court prohibiting prosecutors, defense counsel, witnesses and other interested parties from making prejudicial pretrial comments which are intended for publication.”
    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.