Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 591 SO2D 960 - Batten v. State

Batten v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 2015

4 state decisions

20199120002010decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 1346

Relies on Pereira v. United States · McNally v. United States · Carpenter v. United States · Durland v. United States · Charter Co. v. Certified Class in the Charter Securities Litigation

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

  1. “The “concern naturally arises that the criminal law will be used to hold businessmen to the maximum, rather than the minimum, standards of ethical behavior.” Be that as it may, we cannot override or ignore the legislature’s determination to create the Act and to provide the standard by which it is to be effectuated. Our uneasiness, no different from that expressed by others in this field, is tempered by the good faith and judgment of those charged with the responsibility to carry out Florida’s regulation of criminal activities. The judiciary, of course, furnishes the oversight capable of remedying abuse.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the Act appears to have been patterned in substantial part after the federal wire and mail fraud statutes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343. At the heart of the Act and the two federal statutes is the concept of ‘a scheme to defraud’ with the utilization of communication techniques as the means to accomplish a deceitful objective.”
    1 later decision 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.