Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 135 Fla. 882 - Manning v. State

Manning v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1939

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
June 1941
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Ellis v. State · American Railway Express Co. v. Weatherford · Ex parte McDaniel · Mathis v. State · Anderson v. Chapman

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

  1. ““In the present case the alleged judgment and sentence imposed reads as follows: “ ‘State of Florida v. J. C. Anderson. Now on this day came in person the defendant, J. C. Anderson, into open court after being duly arraigned entered his plea of guilty to robbery, the charge contained in the information filed herein against him. And being asked by the court whether or not he had anything to say why sentence of the law should not now be pronounced upon him, say nothing.’ ” “ ‘It is, therefore, considered by the court that you, J. C. Anderson, for the crime of which you have been and stand convicted, do be imprisoned by confinement at hard labor in the State Prison for a period of ten (10) years.’ ” “While such a judgment entry may be fatally defective because it does not clearly adjudicate the defendant’s guilt, nevertheless, it does recite the fact that with the approval of the court the defendant has been and stands convicted of the described crime of robbery, the charge contained in the information filed against him. Such a recital to the effect that the accused ‘stands convicted’ implies an adjudication of guilt, (See Ex Parte McDaniel, 86 Fla. 145 , 97 Sou. Rep. 317 ) by way of inference, and though not sufficient to stand against reversal on writ of error in an inferential form, is none the less such a form of attempted adjudication of guilt as will support a writ of error, and is therefore not wholly void in its effect as a judgment.””
    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.