Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 772 So. 2d 1209 - State v. McFadden

772 So. 2d 1209 - State v. McFadden’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
June 2022
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2022

3 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

100200020102020decided

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 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State · 395 So. 2d 1145 - McCrae v. State · Smith v. State · Ellis v. State · 763 So. 2d 285 - Raulerson 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[Although an adjudication of guilt is generally required for there to be a “conviction,” that term as used in Florida law is a chameleon-like term that has drawn its meaning from the particular statutory context in which the term is used.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “In the absence of a definition of “conviction” in section 90.610(1), it is appropriate to resort to prior case law. See State v. Mitro, 700 So.2d 643 , 645 (Fla.1997). Defining “conviction” to require the adjudication of guilt is consistent with this Court’s jurisprudence. Before the enactment of the Florida Evidence Code in 1976, this Court on several occasions had defined the term “conviction” as encompassing a guilty plea or verdict of guilty along with a judgment by the court. Over one hundred years ago, this Court in Barnes observed that in its “ordinary sense,” the term “ ‘conviction’ means the ascertainment of the guilt of a party, either by a plea of guilty, or by the verdict of a jury.” State ex rel. Owens v. Barnes, 24 Fla. 153 , 157, 4 So. 560 , 561 (1888). However, the Court recognized that, “numerous authorities” held that a “judgment or sentence [was] a necessary component part of ‘convietion.’ ” Id. Thus, for purposes of construing the term “conviction” as used in a statute dealing with “conviction fees,” the Court used a definition of conviction that included the judgment and sentence of the court. Id. at 161, 4 So. at 562 . Similarly, this Court once again addressed the definition of “convicted” in the case of Smith v. State, 75 Fla. 468 , 473, 78 So. 530 , 532 (1918), where the Court construed the term as used in a statute prohibiting the selling of intoxicating liquors to minors. According to this Court, “The meaning of the word ‘convicted’ as used in the s”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “(1) A party may attack the credibility of any witness, including an accused, by evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year under the law under which the witness was convicted, or if the crime involved dishonesty or a false statement regardless of the punishment. ...”
    3 later decisions 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.