Tengbergen v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “While Tengbergen contends that the court erred by not “qualifying” McNevin as an expert, the trial court determined that the requirements for the introduction of expert testimony were met when it overruled the defense objection that McNevin was not qualified as an expert. Although the court did not explicitly state to the jury that it found the witness qualified as an -expert, the court reasonably- followed the suggestion of this court that a court should refrain from telling the jury .that the witness’s testimony is being admitted as “expert testimony, ” because that may be tantamount to the court commenting on the credibility of a witness. See Alexander v. State, 931 So.2d 946, 951 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (“the better procedure would have been to permit the witness to testify without reference to his or her status as an expert”). See also Chambliss v. White Motor Corp,, 481 So.2d 6, 8 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (“[I]t is, not necessary for the court to state that the witness is qualified as an expert. In fact, it is questionable whether it is , proper procedure for a court to expressly declare a witness an ‘expert’ because the jury may infer from such declaration that the court is placing its approval on the opinions of the -witness.”). The court appropriately ruled, and it committed no. error.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kevin Osorio v. State of Florida

2. “If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or in determining a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify about it in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if: (1) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; (2) ■ The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (3) The witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Crane Co. v. DeLisle

3. ““A trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress comes to the appellate court clothed -with a presumption of correctness and the court must interpret the evidence and reasonable inferences and deductions derived therefrom in a manner most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s ruling.” An appellate court accords a presumption of correctness to the trial court’s ruling on motion to suppress with regard to the trial court’s determination of historical facts, but independently reviews mixed questions of law and fact.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Day v. State