735 So. 2d 1031 - Mickell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
July 2017
most recently cited
15 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 538 So. 2d 329 - Pinkney v. State · Hill v. State · 362 So. 2d 1236 - Voyles v. State · 658 So. 2d 847 - Westbrook v. State · Duckworth 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.
“is not whether the circuit judge ruled contrary to what one of us might have ruled, not whether he was 'right' or 'wrong' in our view, but whether he abused his discretion. And, unless the trial [judge] based his decision on an erroneous view of the law, we are not authorized to reverse for an abuse of discretion unless we find it was 'arbitrary and clearly erroneous.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]n cases of prosecutorial misconduct we have held [that] this Court [is not] constrained from considering the merits of the alleged prejudice by the fact that objections were made and sustained, or that no objections were made.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[a] pronouncement by the trial court that such evidence was not essential to a conviction for armed robbery could easily have undermined a legitimate analysis of the strength of the State's proof.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.