Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 681 So. 2d 480 - State v. Thames

681 So. 2d 480 - State v. Thames’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
October 2009
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · 443 So. 2d 522 - State v. Sweeney · 486 So. 2d 106 - State v. Lombard · 450 So. 2d 621 - State v. Jackson · 663 So. 2d 27 - State v. Silman

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.

  1. “The State is not required to offer any proof of the defendant’s sanity or to offer evidence to rebut the defendant’s evidence. Instead, the determination of whether defendant’s evidence successfully rebuts the presumption of sanity is made by the trier of fact viewing all the evidence, including lay and expert testimony, the conduct of the defendant, and the defendant’s actions in committing the particular crime.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[w]hen the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm.”
    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.