639 So. 2d 557 - Gurley v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently June 2018
18 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Agurs · California v. Trombetta · Arizona v. Youngblood · 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" '[T]he error of failing to instruct the jury on the need for corroborative evidence is harmless when the testimony of an accomplice has in fact been corroborated. Frazier v. State , 562 So.2d 543 , 558 (Ala.Cr.App.), reversed on other grounds, 562 So.2d 560 (Ala. 1989). Accord People v. Brunner , 797 P.2d 788 , 790 (Colo.App. 1990); State v. Brown [ 187 Conn. 602 ], 447 A.2d 734 , 740 (Conn. 1982); Ali v. United States , 581 A.2d 368 , 377-78 (D.C.App. 1990), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 893 , 112 S.Ct. 259 , 116 L.Ed.2d 213 (1991); Strong v. State , 261 Md. 371 , 275 A.2d 491 , 495 (1971), vacated on other grounds, 408 U.S. 939 , 92 S.Ct. 2872 , 33 L.Ed.2d 760 (1972); State v. England , 409 N.W.2d 262 , 265 (Minn.App. 1987).' "”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Arthur v. State · Weaver v. State“'The appellant . . . insists that because the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“'Relying upon state constitutional law, some states hold that even in situations where defendants cannot show bad faith on the part of the state in failing to preserve material evidence, defendants may nonetheless be entitled to an adverse-inference instruction, dismissal, or new trial if they can make a sufficient showing of substantial prejudice. These states take authority from Justice Stevens's concurring opinion in Arizona v. Youngblood wherein he wrote:”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.