577 So. 2d 956 - Kopko v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 state decisions

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

1. “Accordingly we hold that where a child victim is able at trial to fully and accurately recount the crime perpetrated on him or her, it is error also to allow the introduction of prior consistent statements made by the child. Where the child's out-of-court statements are needed to provide evidence of any aspect of the crime or related events which the testifying or unavailable child cannot adequately supply, such out-of-court statements are available pursuant to section 90.803(23). ... . ... Appellant is entitled to a new trial in which... the child victim's version of events can be submitted by the state to the jury once — unless the defense opens the door to more.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 582 So. 2d 1225 - State v. Pardo

2. “By having the child testify and then by routing the child's words through respected adult witnesses, such as doctors, psychologists, [Child Protection Team] specialists, police and the like, with the attendant sophistication of vocabulary and description, there would seem to be a real risk that the testimony will take on an importance or appear to have an imprimatur of truth far beyond the content of the testimony.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 596 So. 2d 665 - Pardo v. State

3. “In a case in which the child victim of a sexual offense testified fully and completely at trial as to the offense perpetrated upon him or her, can it constitute reversible error to admit, pursuant to section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes [1989], prior, consistent out-of-court statements of the child which were cumulative to the child's in-court testimony or merely bolstered it?”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Kopko