796 So. 2d 223 - Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited
18 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on McClain v. State · 440 So. 2d 297 - Groseclose v. State · 460 So. 2d 778 - May v. State · 681 So. 2d 521 - Hoops v. State · 428 So. 2d 1361 - Pearson 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a combination of two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful purpose or to accomplish a lawful purpose unlawfully, the persons agreeing in order to form the conspiracy,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“jurors are permitted, indeed have the duty, to resolve the conflicts in testimony they hear. They may believe or disbelieve, accept or reject the utterances of any witness ... A reviewing court cannot and need not determine with exactitude which witness or what testimony the jury believed or disbelieved in arriving at its verdict. Also ... this Court [has] stated that in a criminal prosecution, the jury may accept the testimony of some witnesses and reject that of others, and may accept in part and reject in part the testimony of any witnesses, or may believe part of the evidence on behalf of the state and part of that for the accused, and the credibility of such witnesses is not for the reviewing court, but only for the jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Vickers v. State“in considering whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction in the face of a motion for ... judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the critical in quiry is whether the evidence shows “beyond a reasonable doubt that [the] accused committed the act charged, and that he did so under such circumstances that every element of the offense existed; and where the evidence fails to meet this test it is insufficient to support a conviction.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCallum 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.