74 So. 3d 342 - Glidden v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
October 2017
most recently cited
13 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 895 So. 2d 836 - Bush v. State · 460 So. 2d 778 - May v. State · 469 So. 2d 68 - Edwards v. State · 249 So. 2d 414 - Curry v. State · 909 So. 2d 731 - Dilworth 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]here must be sufficient facts to warrant a finding that defendant was aware of the presence and character of 'the particular substance and was intentionally and consciously in possession of it. It need not be actual physical possession. Constructive possession may be shown by establishing that the drug involved was subject to his dominion or control. Proximity is usually an essential element, but by itself is not adequate in the absence of other incriminating circumstances.”
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.