Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 603 So. 2d 857 - Ross v. State

603 So. 2d 857 - Ross v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
1
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably 725 So. 2d 836 - Bell v. State (1998), 692 So. 2d 755 - Lester v. State (1997)

50 state decisions

200199220002010decided

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 United States v. Wade · Foy v. Northeast Suburban Life · Kliewer v. New Jersey · United States v. Eichman · Gibson v. United States

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

  1. “[T]he rule barring comment [does] not apply where a witness, while technically accessible to both parties, stood more available to the complaining party. Where a defendant fails to call a witness more available to him and presumptively in a closer relationship with him, the state is fully entitled to comment on the party's failure to call the witness.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The rule of law requires that, through the record, the appellant must establish any facts underlying a claim of error. This Court cannot review an allegation of error without having before it a reviewable record; nor can this Court [sic] rely on assertions of fact in an appellant's brief.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Every person who shall be convicted of breaking and entering, in the day or night, the dwelling house of another, in which there shall be, at the time, some human being, with intent to commit some crime therein, either by forcibly bursting or breaking the wall, or an outer door, window or shutter, of a window of such house, or the lock or bolt of such door, or the fastening of such window or shutter, or by breaking in any other manner, or with the assistance of one or more confederates, then present and assisting, or by unlocking an outer door by means of false keys, or by picking the lock thereof, shall be guilty of burglary, and imprisoned in the penitentiary not less than seven years nor more than fifteen years.”
    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.