941 So. 2d 556 - State v. Arnal’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
January 2019
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 758 So. 2d 110 - State v. Kalogeropolous · State v. Hunwick · 766 So. 2d 1137 - State v. Ortiz · State v. Paleveda · 388 So. 2d 38 - State v. Fetherolf
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Ijntent or state of mind is not an issue to be decided on a motion to dismiss under Rule 3.190(c)(4). Instead, it is usually inferred from the circumstances surrounding the defendant’s actions. Since the trier of fact has the opportunity to weigh the evidence and judge the credibility of the witnesses, it should determine intent or state of mind.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Yaqubie“the State is not obligated to pre-try its case, only to provide sufficient facts, when viewed in a light most favorable to the State, to show that a reasonable jury could rule in its favor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“entitled to the most favorable construction of the evidence with all inferences being resolved against the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Espinoza
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.