Tucker v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 2018
12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Bourjaily v. United States · 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · 246 So. 2d 771 - Richardson v. State · 283 So. 2d 553 - McDole v. State · State v. Jano
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“before there was time to contrive or misrepresent,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Because of these three factual preconditions to the admission of an excited utterance, the procedures for preliminary questions outlined in section 90.105(1), Florida Statutes (2002), apply when a party seeks to introduce an excited utterance into evidence over the objection of the opposing party.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Roop v. State“`excitement' for purposes of an utterance is not a matter that is determined exclusively by tone of voice. Some people remain calm of voice when under stress; others can be excited of voice when fully capable of misrepresentation.”
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.