652 So. 2d 437 - Arney v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
November 1997
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · State v. Townsend · 632 So. 2d 1372 - Hopkins v. State · 648 So. 2d 715 - Perez v. State · Dupree v. State
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Harmless error is not a device for the appellate court to substitute itself for the trier-of-fact by simply weighing the evidence. The focus is on the effect of the error on the trier-of-fact. The question is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error affected the verdict. The burden to show the error was harmless must remain on the state. If the appellate court cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not affect the verdict, then the error is by definition harmful.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mathis v. State“we are unable to divine what was in the jurors' minds when they rendered their verdict[s], or how much weight they attributed to the ... out-of-court statements. It is precisely for this reason that we are unable to conclude that the error[][was] harmless.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mathis v. State“might well have had a significant reinforcing effect in the minds of the jury regarding the [child's] credibility.”
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.