550 So. 2d 102 - Eberhardt v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably Cotton v. State (2000), 583 So. 2d 642 - Christopher v. State (1991)
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 Estelle v. Williams · Alexander v. United States · McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco · Medlin v. Mann · First National Bank v. United States
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.
“"When the state offers in evidence a part of a confession or admission against interest, the defendant is entitled to bring out on cross-examination the entire confession or admission. Louette v. State, 152 Fla. 495 , 12 So.2d 168 (1943). In Eberhardt v. State, 550 So.2d 102, 105 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), review denied, 560 So.2d 234 (Fla. 1990), the rule was applied as follows: `Because portions of the defendant's conversation with the officer were admitted on direct examination, the rule of completeness generally allows admission of the balance of the conversation as well as other related conversations that in fairness are necessary for the jury to accurately perceive the whole context of what has transpired between the two. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence, § 108.1 (2d Ed.1984). Once the officer testified in the state's case-in-chief about one portion of Eberhardt's statements to him, the court erred in sustaining the state's hearsay objection for the reason that his statements he was `high' or intoxicated were self serving. Heathcoat v. State, 430 So.2d 945 (Fla. 2d DCA), aff'd, 442 So.2d 955 (Fla.1983).'"”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Sweet v. State · Whitfield v. State“Although we conclude that it was error for the court to permit the venire to see [defendant] in the courtroom in prison clothes, defense counsel did not properly preserve this objection as a basis for reversal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lynch v. State“A defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on the theory of his defense if there is evidence in the record to support it, regardless of how weak or improbable it may be.”
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.