562 So. 2d 580 - Hubbard v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 1992
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Austin v. United States · 456 So. 2d 1156 - Reeves v. State · 414 So. 2d 998 - Dickerson v. State · 369 So. 2d 863 - Weatherford v. State · 452 So. 2d 508 - Ex Parte Edwards
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"After a close reading of Rule 15.4(h), we find nothing therein which prohibits the prosecution from having one more strike than the combined number of strikes of the codefendants. This rule simply requires that all co-defendants have an equal number of strikes. The appellants each had eleven strikes and, thus, Rule 15.4(h) was not violated in this instance."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"... Obviously, the trial jury found the existence of all the elements of possession of cannabis since it returned a guilty verdict for the higher offense of trafficking in cannabis. We find the trial judge was correct in this instance by entering a judgment of conviction for the offense of possession of cannabis as to these two appellants."”
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.