Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 978 So. 2d 149 - Blanton v. State

978 So. 2d 149 - Blanton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
December 2025
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 2025

19 state decisions

110200820102020decided

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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Crawford v. Washington · Ohio v. Roberts · Davis v. Washington · Barber v. Page

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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the exercise of the right to take a discovery deposition under rule 3.220 does not serve as the functional substitute for in-court confrontation of the witness.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “However, the mere fact that evidence meets the requirements of an exception to the hearsay rule does not necessarily mean it is admissible as evidence. The statement might be inadmissible for other reasons, including that the use of the statement would violate the defendant's constitutional right of confrontation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the admission of a hearsay statement made by a declarant who does not testify at trial violates the Sixth Amendment if (1) the statement is testimonial, (2) the declarant is unavailable, and (3) the defendant lacked a prior opportunity for cross-examination of the declarant.”
    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.