Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 state decisions

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Chicone requires that, where a defendant requests it, the jury must be instructed that the defendant have knowledge that the substance is illegal. In this case the instruction was not requested, but defendant argues that it was fundamental error not to give it. Because guilty knowledge was not an issue in this case, in that the only position taken by the defendant was that he was not the person who sold the cocaine to the informant, any error in not giving a guilty knowledge instruction would not rise to the level of fundamental error. State v. Delva, 575 So.2d 643 (Fla.1991). We therefore affirm.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Starling v. State · 854 So. 2d 758 - Garcia v. State

2. “There was no suggestion that Delva was arguing that while he knew of the existence of the package he did not know what it contained.... Because knowledge that the substance in the package was cocaine was not at issue as a defense, the failure to instruct the jury on that element of the crime could not be fundamental error and could only be preserved for appeal by a proper objection.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 837 So. 2d 559 - Ozell v. State

3. “We do not agree with appellant that there is a conflict between Scott and Delva because in Scott the error was preserved.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 854 So. 2d 758 - Garcia v. State