Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 568 SO2D 351 - Howington v. State

Howington v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
September 1993
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Floyd v. State · Woods v. State · 398 So. 2d 762 - Hinshaw v. State · 555 So. 2d 1153 - Garnett v. State · EX PARTE McCRARY

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

  1. “'When, as here, a trial court immediately charges the jury to disregard improper remarks, there is a prima facie presumption against error. Where a trial court acts promptly to impress upon the jury that improper [remarks] are to be disregarded by them in their deliberations, the prejudicial effects of such remarks are removed.'”
    2 later decisions 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.