Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 610 So. 2d 857 - State v. Serigny

610 So. 2d 857 - State v. Serigny’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
2
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Harris v. Warden (1998), 52 So. 3d 89 - State v. Declouet (2010)

2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

230199220002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Brewster v. Derwinski · 322 So. 2d 189 - State v. Butler · State v. Sullivan · State v. Cage

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

  1. “no reasonable jury could have reasonably concluded that defendant merely intended to inflict great bodily harm on the defendant.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A. Any person who, having a specific intent to commit a crime, does or omits an act for the purpose of and tending directly toward the accomplishing of his object is guilty of an attempt to commit the offense intended; and it shall be immaterial whether, under the circumstances, he would have actually accomplished his purpose. B. Mere preparation to commit a crime shall not be sufficient to constitute an attempt; but lying in wait with a dangerous weapon with the intent to commit a crime, or searching for the intended victim with a dangerous weapon with the intent to commit a crime, shall be sufficient to constitute an attempt to commit the offense intended.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Second degree murder is the killing of a human being: (1) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm; or (2) When the offender is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of... armed robbery, first degree robbery, or simple robbery, even though he has no intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm.”
    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.