Bianchi v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
December 1996
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 500 So. 2d 519 - Lawhorne v. State · 491 So. 2d 537 - Bell v. State · 470 So. 2d 836 - Preston v. State · 287 So. 2d 733 - Kellam v. Thomas · 523 So. 2d 1261 - Quiles 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement and the statement is: ... . Consistent with his testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against him of improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication. .. .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lazarowicz v. State“prior to the existence of a fact said to indicate bias, interest, corruption, or other motive to falsify.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Keffer v. State
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.