Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 601 SO2D 529 - Bryant v. State

Bryant v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
February 2017
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently February 2017

20 state decisions

80199220002010decided

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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Wainwright v. Witt · Adams v. Texas · Wingo v. Wedding · 283 So. 2d 1 - State v. Dixon

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

  1. “make sure the prospective juror can be an impartial member of the jury.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he “Defendant is entitled to have the jury instructed on the rules of law applicable to this theory of the defense if there is any evidence to support such instructions.” Hooper v. State, 476 So.2d 1253, 1256 (Fla. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1098 , 106 S.Ct. 1501 , 89 L.Ed.2d 901 (1986) (emphasis added); Smith v. State, 492 So.2d 1063 (Fla. 1986). Regarding mitigating factors dealing with extreme mental or emotional disturbance, we have stated that where a defendant has produced any evidence to support giving instructions on such mitigating factors, the trial judge should read the applicable instructions to the jury. Toole v. State, 479 So.2d 731 (Fla. 1985).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[I]f there is basis for any reasonable doubt as to any juror's possessing that state of mind which will enable him to render an impartial verdict based solely on the evidence submitted and the law announced at the trial he should be excused on motion of a party, or by the court on its own motion.”
    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.