Rice v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
November 1990
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State · 531 So. 2d 133 - Kinchen v. State · 407 So. 2d 1007 - Gelabert v. State · Johnson 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[W]hen a question, posed on cross-examination, relates only to a matter collateral and non-material to any issue at trial, the witness' answer to the question is deemed conclusive. Consequently, the witness cannot be impeached with regard to this testimony by any of the normal means of subsequent impeachment, including contradiction testimony by another witness." (Citations omitted). The test of relevancy and materiality is whether the cross-examining party could have, for any purpose other than impeachment, introduced evidence on the subject in its case in chief. Johnson v. State, 178 So.2d 724 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). If the evidence is relevant to independently prove a material fact or issue or if it goes to discredit a witness by pointing out bias, corruption, or lack of competency, it will be allowed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Davila
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.