675 So. 2d 196 - TS v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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. “In the instant case, the fact finder could reasonably infer from the evidence presented that appellant’s hypothesis of innocence, that he didn’t know the other boys were going to take the condoms and that he was just nervously looking around, was not reasonable.... [By his actions, t]he appellant demonstrated a deliberate pattern of conduct, both before and after the other boys had concealed the condoms.... A fact finder could reasonably infer that, as a result of appellant’s consistent actions both before and after the actual taking of the property, the only reasonable hypothesis from the evidence presented was that appellant intended to be, and was, an active participant in the theft as a lookout.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. A.M. v. State

2. “While it is well settled that mere presence at the scene, knowledge of the crime and flight are insufficient to justify a conviction, it is also clear that elements of assistance of the perpetrator and intent may be proved by a combination of surrounding circumstances.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 918 So. 2d 379 - Davis v. State