805 So. 2d 120 - Barows v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 751 So. 2d 537 - Goodwin v. State · 594 So. 2d 859 - Auchmuty v. State · 678 So. 2d 895 - Livingston v. State · 577 So. 2d 606 - Jones v. State · 735 So. 2d 579 - Purcell 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Section 90.608(2), Florida Statutes, as well as the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, guarantee a defendant `the right to a full and fair opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witnesses in order to show their bias or motive to be untruthful.' Patently, `[a] defendant has a strong interest in discrediting a crucial state's witness by showing bias, an interest in the outcome, or a possible ulterior motive for his in-court testimony.' Furthermore, `[b]ecause liberty is at risk in a criminal case, a defendant is afforded wide latitude to develop the motive behind a witness' testimony.'"[c.o.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Childers v. Floyd · Mouery v. State“that might at first blush appear to be lacking any basis at all thus far in the trial, so long as counsel states a basis tending ultimately to show such bias.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“where such evidence was relevant to show bias or motive to lie”
1 later decision 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.