620 So. 2d 180 - Conley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

cited by 55 later decisions

states following

September 2018

most recently cited

55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably 790 So. 2d 1094 - Banks v. State (2001), 782 So. 2d 343 - Muhammad v. State (2001)

55 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 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · Joseph v. United States · First National Bank v. United States · Biondi v. United States · 524 So. 2d 403 - Torres-Arboledo 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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“Even if we were to conclude that the testimony was not used to prove the truth of the matter asserted, the contents of the statement were not relevant to establish a logical sequence of events, nor was the reason why officers arrived at the scene a material issue in the case. As we said in Baird , the inherently prejudicial effect of admitting into evidence an out-of-court statement relating accusatory information to establish the logical sequence of events outweighs the probative value of such evidence. Such practice must be avoided.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Adams v. State · Keen v. State
“[W]hen the only purpose for admitting testimony relating accusatory information received from an informant is to show a logical sequence of events leading up to an arrest, the need for the evidence is slight and the likelihood of misuse is great. In light of the inherently prejudicial effect of an out-of-court statement that the defendant engaged in the criminal activity for which he is being tried, we agree that when the only relevance of such a statement is to show a logical sequence of events leading up to an arrest, the better practice is to allow the officer to state that he acted upon a "tip" or "information received," without going into the details of the accusatory information.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
e.g. Keen v. State · 908 So. 2d 1185 - Powell v. State
“Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment by a person seeking the diagnosis or treatment, ... which statements describe medical history, past or present symptoms, pain or sensations, or the inceptions or general character of the cause or external source thereof, insofar as reasonably pertinent to diagnosis or treatment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
e.g. 990 So. 2d 671 - Roberts v. State · 879 So. 2d 38 - Herrera 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.