Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 690 So. 2d 1241 - Medina v. State

690 So. 2d 1241 - Medina v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
April 2013
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently April 2013

18 state decisions

90199720002010decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Dusky v. United States · Ford v. Wainwright · Cooper v. Oklahoma · In re Geschke

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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “until there was a determination that there was an issue that warranted an evidentiary hearing, Medina was clearly not entitled to a competency determination for the purpose of counsel proceeding to a Huff [v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993)] hearing.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “The prisoner's interest in avoiding an erroneous determination is, of course, very great. But I consider it self-evident that once society has validly convicted an individual of a crime and therefore established its right to punish, the demands of due process are reduced accordingly. Moreover, the potential for false claims and deliberate delay in this context is obviously enormous. This potential is exacerbated by a unique feature of the prisoner's protected interest in suspending the execution of a death sentence during incompetency. By definition, this interest can never be conclusively and finally determined: Regardless of the number of prior adjudications of the issue, until the very moment of execution the prisoner can claim that he has become insane sometime after the previous determination to the contrary. These difficulties, together with the fact that the issue arises only after conviction and sentencing, convince me that the Due Process Clause imposes few requirements on the States in this context.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “reasonable grounds to believe that the prisoner is insane to be executed, the judge shall grant a stay of execution and may order further proceedings which may include a hearing pursuant to [Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure] 3.812.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.