Black v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Rimmer v. State (2002), 972 So. 2d 839 - Blake v. State (2007)
25 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 Colorado v. Connelly · Texas v. Brown · Horton v. California · Needler v. Valley National Bank of Arizona · Lisenba v. People of State of California
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the facts available to the [seizing] officer would `warrant a person of reasonable caution in the belief,' that certain items may be contraband or stolen property or useful as evidence of a crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“And the aforesaid Assistant State Attorney, under oath, further information makes that GAIL ROMEIS DAVIS on or about DECEMBER 08, 1994, in the County and State aforesaid, without lawful authority did then and there forcibly, secretly, or by threat, confine, abduct or imprison another person, to wit: T.D. (A MINOR) against that person's will and/or said victim being under the age of thirteen (13) years and said confinement was without the consent of said victim’s parent or legal guardian, with the intent to commit or facilitate the commission of any felony, to wit: ROBBERY, in violation of s. 787.01, Fla. Stat., contrary to the form of the Statute in such cases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“For a confession or inculpatory statement to be voluntary, the totality of the circumstances surrounding the statement must indicate the statement was the result of a free and rational choice. The mind of the accused should, at the time, be free to act, uninfluenced by fear or hope. To exclude a confession or an inculpatory statement, it is not necessary that any direct promises or threats be made to the accused. It is sufficient if the circumstances or declarations of those present are calculated to delude the prisoner as to his true position and exert an improper influence over his mind. A confession or inculpatory statement is not freely and voluntarily given if it has been elicited by direct or implied promises, however slight.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ramirez 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.