Tinker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Before you can find the defendant guilty of burglary of a dwelling, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: Number one, Kenneth Jones entered or remained in a structure owned by or in the possession of Jacky Atiene. Two, Kenneth Jones did not have the permission or consent of Jacky Atiene or anyone authorized to act for him to enter the structure at the time. Three, at the time of entering or remaining in the structure, Kenneth Jones had a fully-formed conscious intent to commit the offense of theft in that structure. Four, the structure entered into or remained in was a dwélling.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jones v. State

2. “'an instruction is confusing or misleading, prejudicial error occurs where the jury might reasonably have been misled and the instruction caused them to arrive at a conclusion that it otherwise would not have reached.’ ” (quoting Tinker v. State, 784 So.2d 1198, 1200 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001))). .The state moved a certified copy of Mr. Cram's driving record into evidence, which showed that his”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Crain v. State

3. “portion of the definition for burglary only applies to the second way of committing burglary. Here, there was no evidence that the victim ever consented to the defendant's entry into her dwelling. Thus, there is no issue here as to the second type of burglary. Nevertheless, the instruction given included the”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. State