616 So. 2d 1065 - Lord v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
3
states following
March 2003
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Reynolds v. State · State v. Medlin · State v. Dempsey · 238 So. 2d 75 - State v. Eckroth · United States v. One Gates Learjet
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Treating the discovery of trace amounts on an object as the basis for a paraphernalia prosecution is more consistent with the purpose of the drug law than charging the defendant with possession of a residue which presents no risk of future use or sale. Jones, 589 So.2d at 1004 (Ferguson, J., dissenting).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“in order to convict for possession of an illegal substance there must be `a conscious and substantial possession by the accused, as distinguished from a mere involuntary or superficial possession.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. State“an implement which is usable only for the obviously knowing use of the drug.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. State
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.