Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 710 SO2D 201 - Pinfield v. State

Pinfield v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
February 2014
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 2014

6 state decisions

30199820002010decided

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 Bundy v. Rudd · 663 So. 2d 624 - Atkins v. State · 656 So. 2d 1327 - Guzzetta v. Hamrick · Fogan v. Fogan

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

  1. “(g) Determination—Successive Motions. If a judge has been previously disqualified on motion for alleged prejudice or partiality under subdivision (d)(1), a successor judge shall not be disqualified based on a successive motion by the same party unless the successor judge rules that he or she is in fact not fair or impartial in the case. Such a successor judge may pass on the truth of the facts alleged in support of the motion.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the record clearly refutes the successor judge's decision to deny the motion.”
    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.