Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 711 SO2D 253 - Almanza v. State

Almanza v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
April 2001
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 576 So. 2d 1310 - Perkins v. State · 585 So. 2d 1079 - Coon v. State · McCaskill v. Union Naval Stores Co. · 386 So. 2d 43 - Estevez v. Gordon · 533 So. 2d 924 - Moore 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “This is not a case where forfeiture of the firearm was included as a condition of the plea, nor has the state commenced a forfeiture proceeding under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, §§ 932.701-932.707, Florida Statutes (1995), or any other statute. Section 790.08(2) does not apply. The state has not pointed us to any other statute that would control.”
    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.