Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 556 SO2D 453 - Wilkerson v. State

Wilkerson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
4
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Davis v. Williams (2006), 160 Wis. 2d 207 - City of Milwaukee v. Wroten (1991)

26 state decisions

1501990200020102020decided

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 Broadrick v. Oklahoma · City of Houston v. Hill · Colten v. Commonwealth of Kentucky · Finch v. Connor · Trushin 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Whoever shall resist, obstruct, or oppose any officer ... in the lawful execution of any legal duty, without offering or doing violence to the person of the officer, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree....”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. JMC v. State · J.M.C. v. State
  2. “We conclude that the use of `oppose' in conjunction with `obstruct' manifests a clear and unambiguous legislative intent to proscribe only acts or conduct that operate to physically oppose an officer in the performance of lawful duties.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. W.W. v. State · 993 So. 2d 1182 - WW v. State
  3. “Although a person's speech may at times be implicated incidentally in the enforcement of [section 843.02, Florida Statutes], its plainly legitimate sweep is to reach conduct that physically obstructs or opposes an officer in the performance of lawful duties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. 834 So. 2d 237 - HAP 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.