663 So. 2d 27 - State v. Silman’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 127 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 128 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably 943 So. 2d 362 - State v. Marshall (2006), 957 So. 2d 1280 - State v. MacOn (2007)
1 federal appellate · 127 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 Jackson v. Virginia · 523 So. 2d 1305 - State v. Mussall · 450 So. 2d 634 - State v. Nealy · State v. Roy · Melerine 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 128 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“All evidence, including expert and lay testimony, besides the defendant's conduct and actions, should be reserved for the fact finder to establish whether the defendant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he was insane at the time of the offense. Lay testimony concerning the defendant's actions, both before and after the crime, may give the fact finder a rational basis for rejecting unanimous medical opinion that the defendant was legally insane at the time of the offense.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Morgan · State v. Perez“[A] determination of the weight of evidence is a question of fact which rests solely with the trier of fact who may accept or reject, in whole or in part, the testimony of any witnesses.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T[he defense’s case on insanity consisted óf the twenty-five year history of mental illness with delusions,' auditory hallucinations, religious obsessions and occasional psychotic episodes, particularly when defendant was subjected to stress or failed to take his medication; the testimony of three psychiatrists and one psychologist who opined that defendant could not distinguish right from wrong at the time of the killing; evidence of defendant’s dispute with his bank causing him stress, a precursor of psychotic episodes, and of his involuntary commitment to a mental institution shortly before the killing and his violent behavior there; and extensive evidence of bizarre behavior, before and after the killing, which was consistent with conduct that has led to his numerous hospitalizations.”
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.