652 So. 2d 370 - State v. Mancuso’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably 665 So. 2d 212 - Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (95-2) (1995), Jones v. State (1996)
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 63 Cal. 2d 74 - People v. Holford · Kimoktoak v. State · State v. Sidway · Herchenbach v. Commonwealth · State v. Minkel
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.
“1. (Defendant) was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash resulting in [injury to] [the death of] any person. 2. (Defendant) knew or should have known that [he] [she] was involved in a crash. Give 3a if death is charged or 3b if injury is charged. 3. a. (Defendant) knew or should have known of the injury to or death of the person. b. (Defendant) knew or should have known of the injury to the person. Give 4a, 4b, or both as applicable. 4. a. (Defendant) willfully failed to stop at the scene of the crash or as close to the crash as possible and remain there until [he][she] had given “identifying information” ...; [or] b. (Defendant) willfully failed to render “reasonable assistance” to the injured person if such treatment appeared to be necessary or was requested by the injured person.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The driver of any vehicle involved in a crash occurring on public or private property that results in injury of any person must immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the crash, or as close thereto as possible, and must remain at the scene of the crash until he or she has fulfilled the requirements of § 316.062. Any person who willfully violates this paragraph commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in § 775.082, § 775.083, or § 775.084.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“1) the statute imposes a more severe criminal penalty for leaving the scene of an accident where personal injuries are involved than does a similar statute imposing sanctions where only property damage is involved; and 2) the “statute requires an affirmative course of action to be taken by the driver and it necessarily follows that one must be aware of the facts giving rise to this affirmative duty in order to perform such a duty[.]””
2 later decisions 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.