558 So. 2d 1349 - State v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. “The U.S. Supreme Court found that the introduction of evidence of a crime of which the defendant was previously acquitted may prejudice a jury. Dowling [v.United States, 493 U.S. 342 ,] 110 S.Ct. [668] 674[, 107 L.Ed.2d 708 ]. In that case the court held that the introduction of such evidence was not fundamentally unfair because the judge had specifically instructed the jury both after the witness testified and in his final charge to the jury that the defendant had been acquitted of the other crime and that the evidence of the other crime could only be considered for a very limited purpose. Id. at 671, 674. In the instant case the record does not show that the judge ever informed the jury that Miller had been acquitted of attempted aggravated rape or that he explicitly limited the purpose for which the rape evidence might be considered. Thus the introduction of the rape evidence in the instant case without proper instruction was fundamentally unfair, such that it violates the "`fundamental conceptions of justice which lie at the basis of our civil and political institutions,' Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103, 112 , 55 S.Ct. 340, 342 , 79 L.Ed. 791 (1935), and which define `the community's sense of fair play and decency.' Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165, 173 , 72 S.Ct. 205, 210 , 96 L.Ed. 183 (1952)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 874 So. 2d 318 - State v. Brown

2. “that evidence of a crime of which the defendant has previously been acquitted may be introduced in the trial of that defendant on a second charge when it does not determine an ultimate issue in the second trial without violating the constitutional protection against double jeopardy.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 571 So. 2d 603 - State v. Miller

3. “introduction of the rape evidence was unconstitutional because it violated the due process guarantee of fundamental fairness.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 874 So. 2d 318 - State v. Brown