Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 533 So. 2d 1137 - Scull v. State

533 So. 2d 1137 - Scull v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
2
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

56 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably 656 So. 2d 1253 - Harvey v. Dugger (1995), 787 So. 2d 747 - Stephens v. State (2001)

56 state decisions

3501988199020002010decided

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 Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · Booth v. Maryland · Blanton v. General Electric Credit Corp. · Johnson v. Florida · Bush v. Florida

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

  1. “a sentencing court may decline to find age as a mitigating factor in cases in which the defendants were twenty to twenty-five years old at the time their offenses were committed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Brown v. State · 613 So. 2d 408 - Lucas v. State
  2. “[W]e do not believe that a "history" of prior criminal conduct can be established by contemporaneous crimes, and we recede from language in Ruffin to the contrary.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Hess v. State · 568 So. 2d 18 - Lucas v. State
  3. “age of twenty-four alone could not establish a mitigating factor, but factors which were observable by the judge during the trial and sentencing proceeding support his finding that [defendant's] emotional age was low enough to sustain this mitigating circumstance”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. 664 So. 2d 1085 - State v. Campbell

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.