Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 591 So. 2d 1002 - Ricardo v. State

591 So. 2d 1002 - Ricardo v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

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

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. American College of Physicians · Allied Corp. v. District 17, United Mine Workers · 465 So. 2d 516 - Cruz v. State · 586 So. 2d 319 - State v. Hunter · 588 So. 2d 269 - Strickland 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Cruz establishes that there are two aspects of the defense of entrapment: one tested objectively by the court and the other subjectively by the trier of fact. The threshold test is an objective one focusing on the conduct of the law enforcement personnel involved, and whether that conduct falls below the standard of proper use of governmental power. The trial court addresses this issue by applying a two-prong test and making a determination as a matter of law before the case is presented to the jury. The first prong of this inquiry is whether the police conduct has as its goal the interruption of a specific ongoing criminal activity. This inquiry thus addresses the problem of law enforcement personnel “making” crime, that is, police seeking to prosecute a criminal where no crime would have been committed but for the police conduct originating the crime. The second prong is whether law enforcement has utilized means reasonably tailored to apprehend only those already involved in ongoing criminal activity. This phase of the inquiry addresses the problem of government agents using inappropriate techniques to induce or encourage an individual to engage in conduct constituting a criminal offense where the individual normally would not have engaged in such conduct. If either prong is violated, then there is entrapment as a matter of law and the entrapped individual is entitled to be discharged.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.