Watkins v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
March 2014
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 559 So. 2d 187 - State v. Law · 293 So. 2d 44 - Lynch v. State · 790 So. 2d 1094 - Banks v. State · 790 So. 2d 1194 - Jones v. State · 705 So. 2d 90 - Dupree 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“appellant falsely made, altered, forged or counterfeited the check or that he did some act or said some word that was intended to and did incite or cause an other individual to counterfeit the check. Because the State produced no evidence as to who actually counterfeited the check, it based its case for forgery solely upon the evidence that appellant uttered the counterfeit check. Therefore, taking the evidence in a light most favorable to the State, while appellant’s conduct in uttering the counterfeit check established a prima facie case of uttering a forgery, this evidence, standing alone, did not establish a prima facie case of the separate and distinct crime of forgery.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Carr v. State“To be guilty as a principal for a crime physically committed by another, one must intend that the crime be committed and do some act to assist the other person in actually committing the crime.”
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.