568 So. 2d 1 - Wilhelm v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
February 2004
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Sandstrom v. Montana · Francis v. Franklin · Boyde v. California · 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“0.10 percent or more by weight of alcohol in the person's blood ... shall be prima facie evidence”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“is not a sufficiency-of-the-evidence, a correct result, a not clearly wrong, a substantial evidence, a more probable than not, a clear and convincing, or even an overwhelming evidence test. Harmless error is not a device for the appellate court to substitute itself for the trier-of-fact by simply weighing the evidence. The focus is on the effect of the error on the trier-of-fact. The question is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error affected the verdict. The burden to show the error was harmless must remain on the state. If the appellate court cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not affect the verdict, then the error is by definition harmful.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“However, the fact that this Court has interpreted the words “prima facie” when used in a statute as a valid inference does not mean that a jury instruction utilizing those words is also necessarily valid. Although this court is the final interpreter of state statutory language ... the standard to determine the constitutionality of a jury instruction ... is whether “there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury has applied the challenged instruction in a way” that shifts to the defendant the burden of persuasion on an element of the offense charged.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lamontague 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.