Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 876 So. 2d 29 - Curry v. State

876 So. 2d 29 - Curry v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Williamson v. United States · 462 So. 2d 1082 - State v. Glosson · 629 So. 2d 90 - Munoz v. State · State v. Williams · 848 So. 2d 393 - Farley 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The record demonstrates that the CI approached Curry sometime before the detective was involved with any investigation. The CI encouraged a romantic relationship with Curry involving sexual activity. The CI also gave Curry money to help pay her mortgage. When the CI asked her to help him sell cocaine, she said no. It was only after an abundance of phone calls from the CI, and later the detective, that she acquiesced. The CI provided the cocaine and repeatedly met with Curry at her place of employment. In sum, there was no crime without the CI's prodding and improper conduct, which rose to the level of egregious. For this reason, Curry's due process rights were violated. The trial court should have found entrapment as a matter of law and granted the motion to dismiss.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.