862 So. 2d 56 - State v. Odom’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
February 2019
most recently cited
17 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 559 So. 2d 187 - State v. Law · 293 So. 2d 44 - Lynch v. State · State v. Williams · Lee v. State · 641 So. 2d 483 - Parker 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A motion for judgment of acquittal is designed to challenge the legal sufficiency of the evidence. If the State presents competent evidence to establish each element of the crime, a motion for judgment of acquittal should be denied. A trial court should not grant a motion for judgment of acquittal unless the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the State, fails to establish a prima facie case of guilt.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“As the sole occupant and driver of the vehicle, Odom had exclusive possession of the vehicle creating an inference of his dominion and control over the contraband contained therein particularly since the contraband was found lodged between the driver's seat and the console of the car. Likewise, knowledge of the presence of the contraband . . . could be inferred or presumed because Odom was in exclusive possession of the automobile when it was stopped.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]hile the presumption of guilty knowledge may be overcome by evidence tending to show a lack of guilty knowledge, merely demonstrating that others theoretically had access to the automobile would not necessarily negate the presumption.”
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.