Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 554 So. 2d 1073 - Giles v. State

554 So. 2d 1073 - Giles v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
3
states following
July 2006
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 2006

10 state decisions

60198519902000decided

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 Beck v. Alabama · Murphy v. Florida · Godfrey v. Georgia · McDougall v. North Carolina · Griffin v. Texas

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

  1. “"The appellant and his accomplice, Aaron Jones, traveled to the home of Willene and Carl Nelson in the early morning hours of November 10, 1978, with the intention of robbing the Nelsons. While at the Nelsons' home, the appellant and Jones, in concert, shot or stabbed all six occupants: Carl and Willene Nelson; their three children, Tony, Brenda and Charlie; and Carl's mother, Annie M. Nelson. When the appellant and Jones left, Carl and Willene Nelson were dead and the other four victims were seriously wounded. It is undisputed that the appellant did all of the shooting, including the shooting of Willene and Carl. In his confession, after admitting the shooting, the appellant explained that all of the victims were alive when he finished shooting. He further explained that Jones entered the room after the shooting was completed and suggested that they stab the victims to eliminate any witnesses and that Jones went to the kitchen and retrieved a butcher knife, with which Jones completed the bloody massacre.¹ Therefore, the only material factual distinctions between the prosecution's theory and the appellant's theory in defense involve appellant's intent and the question of who actually inflicted the fatal blows to both Willene and Carl Nelson. ¹ "Appellant's version of the stabbing was in sharp conflict with Jones's confession, in which Jones stated that appellant had the knife and had already stabbed some of the victims before Jones stabbed anyone. See, Jones v. State , [ 520 ”
    4 later decisions 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.