737 So. 2d 555 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 2011
11 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 733 So. 2d 955 - Miller v. State · Harris v. State · Dakes v. State · K.A.N. 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“if a defendant can establish that the premises were open to the public, then this is a complete defense [to burglary].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In need of bail money for his girlfriend, appellant and his co-defendant, with masked faces and guns drawn, entered a convenience store that was open for business. While holding a gun on Mr. Goswami, one of the store owners, appellant followed him behind the checkout counter where the cash register was located, heedless of the other store owner's command that appellant was not permitted in that area. After appellant entered the prohibited area, he turned and fired twice at Mrs. Goswami, wounding her hand. Mr. Goswami immediately began to struggle with appellant's co-felon, and when appellant began striking her husband, Mrs. Goswami fought with appellant. During the fray, Mrs. Goswami obtained the gun she and her husband kept in their shop. Having armed herself, she held the gun on appellant, told the two perpetrators to leave her husband alone, and shot appellant's cohort.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“although the store itself was open to the public, the closed storeroom to which access was clearly restricted was not part of the premises open to the public, within the scope of section 810.02.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.