736 So. 2d 77 - Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

cited by 18 later decisions

states following

December 2013

most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently December 2013

18 state decisions

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 559 So. 2d 187 - State v. Law · 354 So. 2d 362 - Carlile v. GAME AND FRESH WATER FISH COM'N · 413 So. 2d 1217 - Brewer v. State · McDonald v. State · State v. Lewis

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.

“Proof of possession of property recently stolen, unless satisfactorily explained, gives rise to an inference that the person in possession of the property knew or should have known that the property had been stolen.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Walker v. State · J.H. v. State
“[p]roof of mere naked possession of property recently stolen, not aided by other proof that the accused received it knowing it to have been stolen, is not sufficient to show guilty knowledge. Proof of possession should be coupled with evidence of unusual manner of acquisition, attempts at concealment, contradictory statements, the fact that the goods were being sold at less than their value, possession of other stolen property, or other incriminating evidence and circumstances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 870 So. 2d 923 - Bertone v. State · 736 So. 2d 85 - Youngs v. State
“obtained or used the property of another with the intent to deprive that person of the use of the property or to appropriate the property to the accused's use. § 812.014(1). As noted, no evidence, direct or circumstantial, tied M.D.S. to the taking of the Acura from the owners' residence. But the phrase”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. MDS v. State

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.