Amoros v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

cited by 26 later decisions

states following

February 2013

most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably 753 So. 2d 29 - Rodriguez v. State (2000), 564 So. 2d 1060 - Porter v. State (1990)

26 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 Accardi v. Shaughnessy · Rodriguez v. New York · Andrijevic v. Kelleran · Wingo v. Wedding · Anschuetz & Co. v. Mississippi River Bridge Authority

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

“First-degree murder is a heinous crime; however, this statutory aggravating circumstance requires the incident to be 'especially heinous, atrocious, [or] cruel.’ ”); Tedder v. State, 322 So.2d 908, 910 (Fla.1975) (”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 87 So. 3d 667 - Hall v. State · 860 So. 2d 960 - Diaz v. State
“Similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to prove a material fact in issue, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, but it is inadmissible when the evidence is relevant solely to prove bad character or propensity.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Griffin v. State · 780 So. 2d 106 - Robertson v. State
“Perkins is clearly distinguishable because in that case the focus was on a similar pattern of criminal conduct rather than the linking of a defendant to a critical piece of evidence. We conclude that the evidence was relevant and its prejudice did not substantially outweigh its probative value.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Dixon v. State · 609 So. 2d 1337 - Diaz 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.