664 So. 2d 302 - Marshall v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 2010
6 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 Smith v. Phillips · Murphy v. Florida · Jones v. Howard · Bottoson v. Florida · Knapp v. Cardwell
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““First, the complaining party must establish that the information is relevant and material to jury service in the case. Second, that the juror concealed the information during questioning. Lastly, that the failure to disclose the information was not attributable to the complaining party’s lack of diligence.” [c.o.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Tripp v. State · Nicholas 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.