613 So. 2d 441 - Burks v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably 760 So. 2d 924 - Trapp v. State (2000), 699 So. 2d 1312 - Franqui v. State (1997)
50 state decisions
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 Opper v. United States · State v. Lucas · State v. Parker · State v. Allen · State v. Paris
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] person's confession to a crime is not sufficient evidence of a criminal act where no independent direct or circumstantial evidence exists to substantiate the occurrence of a crime. The judicial quest for truth requires that no person be convicted out of derangement, mistake or official fabrication.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“92.565. Admissibility of confession in sexual abuse cases (1) As used in this section, the term "sexual abuse" means an act of a sexual nature or sexual act that may be prosecuted under any law of this state, including those offenses specifically designated in subsection (2). (2) In any criminal action in which the defendant is charged with a crime against a victim under s. 794.011; s. 794.05; s. 800.04; s. 826.04; s. 827.03, involving sexual abuse; s. 827.04, involving sexual abuse; or s. 827.071, or any other crime involving sexual abuse of another, or with any attempt, solicitation, or conspiracy to commit any of these crimes, the defendant's memorialized confession or admission is admissible during trial without the state having to prove a corpus delicti of the crime if the court finds in a hearing conducted outside the presence of the jury that the state is unable to show the existence of each element of the crime, and having so found, further finds that the defendant's confession or admission is trustworthy. Factors which may be relevant in determining whether the state is unable to show the existence of each element of the crime include, but are not limited to, the fact that, at the time the crime was committed, the victim was: (a) Physically helpless, mentally incapacitated, or mentally defective, as those terms are defined in s. 794.011; (b) Physically incapacitated due to age, infirmity, or any other cause; or (c) Less than 12 years of age. (3) Before the court admi”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bradley v. State · A.P. v. State“[T]he state has the burden of proving by substantial evidence that a crime was committed, and ... such proof may be in the form of circumstantial evidence.”
3 later decisions 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.