589 So. 2d 637 - Day v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently June 2015
23 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Francis v. Franklin · Yates v. Evatt · United States v. Beechum · 481 So. 2d 203 - Fisher v. State · Puyallup Tribe v. Department of Game
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Court instructs the jury that the killing of any human being shall be excusable when committed by accident and misfortune, in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation. In this case if you shall find from the evidence, or have a reasonable doubt therefrom, that Alvin Thomas in the heat of passion, upon a sudden and sufficient provocation by William Poe, fired a weapon and said weapon accidentally and/or through misfortune killed William Poe, it is your sworn duty to acquit Alvin Thomas.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Thomas v. State · McTiller v. State“Day offered the testimony to demonstrate the relationship between himself and Johnson, and to explain why their personal relationship would have caused him to panic or act irrationally at the time of the shooting.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“evidence of prior acts offered as having a bearing on the accused's state of mind, [is] an essential factor in determining whether a homicide is manslaughter or murder.”
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.