910 So. 2d 347 - Slater v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
January 2016
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 446 So. 2d 1038 - Lusk v. State · Trotter v. State · 477 So. 2d 553 - Hill v. State · Singleton v. State · 824 So. 2d 977 - Jenkins 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"that a juror should be excused for cause if there is any reasonable doubt about his ability to render an impartial verdict. E.g., Singleton v. State, 783 So.2d 970, 973 (Fla.2001); Juede v. State, 837 So.2d 1114, 1115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). `A juror is not impartial when one side must overcome a preconceived opinion in order to prevail.' Hill v. State, 477 So.2d 553, 556 (Fla.1985). While a trial court is afforded great discretion in ruling on challenges of jurors for cause, close cases involving challenges to the impartiality of potential jurors should be resolved in favor of excusing the juror rather than leaving doubt as to impartiality. Slater v. State, 910 So.2d 347, 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Peters v. State, 874 So.2d 677, 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)."”
3 later decisions 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.