Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 680 So. 2d 848 - Davis v. State

680 So. 2d 848 - Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
January 2018
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 632 So. 2d 936 - Brent v. State · United States v. Fry · 495 So. 2d 486 - Bandy v. State · Wilson v. State · 524 So. 2d 572 - Huntley 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “¶ 10. Section 99-19-81 states: Every person convicted in this state of a felony who shall have been convicted twice previously of any felony or federal crime upon charges separately brought and arising out of separate incidents at different times and who shall have been sentenced to separate terms of one (1) year or more in any state and/or federal penal institution, whether in this state or elsewhere, shall be sentenced to the maximum term of imprisonment prescribed for such felony, and such sentence shall not be reduced or suspended nor shall such person be eligible for parole or probation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[fjederal sentencing guidelines further define "crime of violence" as "any offense under federal or state law punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year that ... has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another” and include within that definition "murder, manslaughter, kidnap[p]ing, aggravated assault, forcible sex offenses, robbery, arson, extortion, extortionate extension of credit, and burglary of a dwelling.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “While the accused enjoys wide latitude in the presentation of witnesses, it is within the discretion of the trial judge to exclude proffered defense testimony, especially when it is collateral to the issues at hand.”
    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.