Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 565 So. 2d 337 - Neely v. State

565 So. 2d 337 - Neely v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
September 1991
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Mooney v. Holohan · 546 So. 2d 1037 - Richardson v. State · 266 So. 2d 661 - State v. Matera · 336 So. 2d 364 - Baker 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The role of the trial court, after we authorized a hearing on the coram nobis application, was to determine the validity .of the allegations. See Richardson [v. State] [ 546 So.2d 1037 ] [Fla.1989] at 1038. The trial court has determined that the allegations were valid, and since there is competent substantial evidence in the record to support that determination, we cannot disturb those findings any more than we could interfere with the original fact-finder’s decision on the motion for judgment of acquittal.”
    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.