Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 90 Fla. 659 - Nickels v. State

Nickels v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1925

Citation profile

176
cited by 176 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
February 2017
most recently cited

2 district · 170 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 176 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2017 · most notably Chambers v. Florida (1940), 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State (1959)

2 district · 170 state decisions

3601925193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Sparf v. United States · People v. . Molineux · Ziang Sung Wan v. United States · State v. Barrington · Curry 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 176 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Evidence that the defendant has committed a similar crime, or one equally heinous, will frequently prompt a more ready belief by the jury that he might have committed the one with which he is charged, thereby predisposing the mind of the juror to believe the prisoner guilty.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “to admit evidence of other or collateral crimes independent of and unconnected with the crime for which the defendant is on trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “where it is impossible to give a complete or intelligent account of the crime charged without referring to the other crime.”
    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.