Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 813 SO2D 956 - Chatman v. State

Chatman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
August 2009
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Ex Parte Edwards · 728 So. 2d 1153 - Lindley v. State · Ex Parte Burnett · Burnett v. State · Burnett 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “`As in Ex parte Edwards, and Ex parte Burnett , the indictment in the instant case did not charge a mental state, and is, therefore, fatally defective with respect to the vehicular-homicide charge. ... Because there has been no adjudication in this case regarding the sufficiency of the evidence to support the appellant's vehicular-homicide charge, the State can, however, reindict the appellant for vehicular homicide using the language set forth in Ex parte Edwards, supra.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “did not charge a mental state, and [was], therefore, fatally defective with respect to the vehicular-homicide charge.”
    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.