Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 605 So. 2d 146 - Sharp v. State

605 So. 2d 146 - Sharp v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
December 2007
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Doyle v. Ohio · 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · MacArthur Co. v. Johns-Manville Corp. · Thompson v. Louisiana

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

  1. “[a]n objection need not always be made at the moment an examination enters impermissible areas of inquiry. An objection made during an impermissible line of questioning is sufficiently timely if it allows the court, had it sustained the objection, to instruct the jury to disregard the testimony or to consider a motion for mistrial.”
    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.