901 So. 2d 1282 - Comby v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited
13 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Ross · Minnesota v. Dickerson · Arizona v. Hicks · California v. Acevedo
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Defects in specific instructions do not require reversal `where all instructions taken as a whole fairly although not perfectlyannounce the applicable primary rules of law.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cotton v. State · Lepine v. State“If, after such opportunity, the defense claims unfair surprise or undue prejudice and seeks a continuance or mistrial, the court shall, in the interest of justice and absent unusual circumstances, exclude the evidence or grant a continuance for a period of time reasonably necessary for the defense to meet the non-disclosed evidence or grant a mistrial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jordan v. State“Comby signed a consent form to have his blood drawn and tested for law enforcement purposes. To determine whether Comb/s consent was valid, the trial court, outside the presence of the jury, heard testimony from the nurses who were present when Comby signed the consent form, the deputy who obtained Comby’s consent, and Comby himself.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Irby v. State
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.