Mannarino v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
March 2016
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · Barnes v. United States · 443 So. 2d 955 - State v. Murray · 476 So. 2d 150 - State v. Marshall · 369 So. 2d 943 - David 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Improper. prosecutorial comments give ■.rise to error justifying mistrial when they-are “so-prejudicial.that [they] vitiate the. entire trial.” In determining whether reversal is warranted for an .improper remark made by a prosecutor during,the closing argument, the court must determine whether the effect of the comment was to prejudice the jury and impair the fairness of the proceeding.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The judge will instruct you the mere fact that the defendant had that card on him, the mere fact that he had it in his possession, presumption of guilt, and he stole those items, unless he can explain them away. And Ms. Bereda’s explanation does riot explain that away.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Improper prosecutorial comments give rise to error justifying mistrial when they are `so prejudicial that [they] vitiate the entire trial.'”
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.