699 So. 2d 988 - Escobar v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably 803 So. 2d 598 - Connor v. State (2001), 739 So. 2d 568 - Ramirez v. State (1999)
52 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Frazier v. Cupp · MacArthur Co. v. Johns-Manville Corp. · 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State · Thompson v. Louisiana
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there must be evidence which indicates a nexus between the flight ... and the crime(s) for which the defendant is being tried in that specific case”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hen a suspected person in any manner attempts to escape or evade a threatened prosecution by flight, concealment, resistance to lawful arrest, or other indications after the fact of a desire to evade prosecution, such fact is admissible, being relevant to the consciousness of guilt which may be inferred from such circumstance.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he cases in which flight evidence has been held inadmissible have contained particular facts which tend to detract from the probative value of such evidence. For instance, the probative value of flight evidence is weakened: 1) if the suspect was unaware at the time of the flight that he was the subject of a criminal investigation for the particular crime charged; 2) where there were not clear indications that the defendant had in fact fled; or, 3) where there was a significant time'delay from the commission of the crime to the time of flight. The interpretation to be gleaned from an act of flight should be made with a sensitivity to the facts of the particular case.”
3 later decisions 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.