Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 641 SO2D 369 - Parker v. State

Parker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
2
states following
February 2018
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably 787 So. 2d 747 - Stephens v. State (2001), Woods v. State (1999)

30 state decisions

160199420002010decided

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 National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · Jones v. Howard · United States v. Alaska · Nebraska v. Wyoming · White v. Illinois

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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In evaluating a juror's qualifications, the trial judge should evaluate all of the questions and answers posed to or received from the juror.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The witness testified that the deputy that shot the victim was six feet two inches tall, weighed 220 to 230 pounds, had black curly hair, and wore wirerimmed glasses. Although the physical appearances of deputies McNesby and Killen are not stated in the record, this description obviously did not match either of them. The witness also said that Parker was wearing a dark jacket, while all the other witnesses said it was tan or light brown. The witness said the victim was wearing a green army jacket, army boots, and a green plaid flannel shirt. In fact, the victim was wearing an orange tee shirt and sandals.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “As we have stated before, "the newly discovered evidence must be of such nature that it would probably produce an acquittal on retrial" to be sufficient to require reversal. Jones v. State, 591 So.2d 911, 915 (Fla.1991). As the court decided, Parker's "new" evidence did not meet this standard. Parker has shown no abuse of discretion in the trial court's ruling, and we will not disturb its determination of this issue. Jent v. State, 408 So.2d 1024 (Fla.1981), cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1111 , 102 S.Ct. 2916 , 73 L.Ed.2d 1322 (1982); Stone v. State, 616 So.2d 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.