619 So. 2d 340 - Harris v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 431 So. 2d 986 - Migliore v. City of Lauderhill · 569 So. 2d 1273 - First Fidelity Bank, N.A., New Jersey v. District Court of Appeal, Fourth District · State v. Arndt · 403 So. 2d 936 - Odom v. State · Ciccarelli v. State
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.
“[N]either a written nor oral interpretation of the inaudible portions of the tape recording is admissible unless such interpretation is properly authenticated by a person having personal knowledge of the contents of the tape recording or by an expert witness skilled in interpreting inaudible tape recordings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. McCoy v. State · Hunt v. State“[p]artial inaudibility or unintelligibility is not a ground for excluding a recording if the audible parts are relevant, authenticated, and otherwise properly admissible.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“in no better position than the jury to determine the contents of the tape recording.”
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.