Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 722 So. 2d 475 - Watson v. State

722 So. 2d 475 - Watson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
2
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently February 2019

16 state decisions

130199820002010decided

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 460 So. 2d 778 - May v. State · 391 So. 2d 601 - Bullock v. State · 533 So. 2d 1078 - Nixon v. State · 380 So. 2d 1276 - Gathright v. State · 428 So. 2d 1361 - Pearson 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a] motion for new trial is discretionary with the trial judge and this Court will not order a new trial unless it is convinced that the verdict is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We have repeatedly held that in a criminal prosecution the jury may accept the testimony of some witnesses and reject that of others, and that they may accept in part and reject in part the evidence on behalf of the state or on behalf of the accused.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “¶ 36. I am of the opinion that in viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Ellis a reasonable jury could find”
    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.