Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 732 SO2D 867 - Cohen v. State

Cohen v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
March 2011
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently March 2011

17 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 State v. Gunzelman · 575 So. 2d 16 - MacKbee v. State · Culberson v. Culberson · 390 So. 2d 287 - Jackson v. Griffin · Laney 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a] defendant is entitled to have jury instructions given which present his theory of the case; however, this entitlement is limited in that the court may refuse an instruction which incorrectly states the law, is fairly covered elsewhere in the instructions, or is without foundation in the evidence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “failed to prove any one or more of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “INSTRUCTION D-6 The Court instructs the Jury that Carl Ray Johnson was not under an obligation to wait for serious bodily harm upon [sic] from R.V. Lewis and Lloyd Jones before Carl Ray Johnson took action to defend himself from an attack. If you find from the evidence that Carl Ray Johnson took action to defend himself without knowing for certain that either R.V. Lewis or Lloyd Jones was about to cause him serious bodily harm, and further that it was reasonably apparent to a reasonable person of average prudence that Carl Ray Johnson was in danger of serious bodily harm, then you must find Carl Ray Johnson not guilty of the murders of R.V. Lewis and Lloyd Jones. It is for the jury to determine the reasonableness of the ground upon which the defendant acted.”
    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.