797 So. 2d 598 - Espiet v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited
22 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Payton v. New York · Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden · G-K Development Co. v. Broadmoor Place Investments · 293 So. 2d 44 - Lynch v. State · Benefield 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The purpose of a motion for judgment of acquittal is to test the legal sufficiency of the evidence presented by the state. See State v. Rivera, 719 So.2d 335, 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). In moving for a judgment of acquittal, a defendant admits all facts and evidence adduced at trial, and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from such evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to the state. Beasley v. State, 774 So.2d 649 (Fla.2000) (quoting Lynch v. State, 293 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla.1974)); Hoffman v. State, 708 So.2d 962 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. MN v. State · Donovan v. State“If, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, a rational trier of fact could find the existence of the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, sufficient evidence exists to sustain a conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McHolder 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.