Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 645 So. 2d 66 - Davis v. State

645 So. 2d 66 - Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
July 2017
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2017

7 state decisions

40199420002010decided

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 Ashe v. Swenson · 602 So. 2d 914 - Florida Bar re: Advisory Opinion · 429 So. 2d 1204 - Gragg v. State · 593 So. 2d 1065 - State v. Strong · 513 So. 2d 679 - State v. Short

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

  1. “[ T]he rule of collateral estoppel in criminal cases is not to be applied with the hypertechnical and archaic approach of a 19th century pleading book, but with realism and rationality. Where a previous judgment of acquittal was based upon a general verdict, as is usually the case, this approach requires a court to “examine the record of a prior proceeding, taking into account the pleadings, evidence, charge, and other relevant matter, and conclude whether a rational jury could have grounded its verdict upon an issue other than that which the defendant seeks to foreclose from consideration.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the jury had simply based its acquittal on the aggravated assault charge on its belief that defendant was more concerned with escape than threat, it had the option of finding defendant guilty of improper exhibition of a firearm if it believed the officers’ testimony. A verdict of not guilty on this lesser offense as well leads us to the inescapable conclusion that the jury necessarily decided that defendant did not possess a firearm.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.