642 So. 2d 730 - Armstrong v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

102

cited by 102 later decisions

states following

January 2019

most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 101 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably 774 So. 2d 637 - Rutherford v. Moore (2000), Sochor v. State (2004)

1 federal appellate · 101 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 Needler v. Valley National Bank of Arizona · Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · Anschuetz & Co. v. Mississippi River Bridge Authority · Thompson v. Virginia · Parker v. Dugger

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

“Moreover, recanting testimony is exceedingly unreliable, and it is the duty of the court to deny a new trial where it is not satisfied that such testimony is true. Especially is this true where the recantation involves a confession of perjury.”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Consalvo v. State · Robinson v. State
“[a]ppointment of multiple counsel to represent an indigent defendant is ... based on a determination of the complexity of a given case and the attorney's effectiveness therein.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
e.g. Kearse v. State · Larkins v. State
“Although the trial judge's articulation of how he considered the mitigating circumstances and aggravating circumstances is somewhat less than a model of clarity, we believe that he properly considered all nonstatutory mitigating circumstances in imposing the death sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
e.g. 820 So. 2d 906 - Griffin 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.