Kirschner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
September 2007
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Anders v. California · 852 So. 2d 226 - FB v. State · 581 So. 2d 149 - In Re Anders Briefs · 809 So. 2d 99 - State v. Fields
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“) was unavailable and that he had a prior opportunity to cross-examine that person. We hold that a self-authenticating driving record is not testimonial hearsay and affirm Card's conviction. To sustain a conviction under section 322.34(5), the State must prove”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Card v. State“Such complete failure of the evidence meets the requirements of fundamental error. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rodriguez 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.