Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 SO3D 98 - A.M. v. State

A.M. v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2014

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 450 So. 2d 217 - Holly v. Auld · 810 So. 2d 901 - Puryear v. State · 963 So. 2d 864 - KE v. Department of Juvenile Justice · JW v. Leitner · Syger v. Syger

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.

  1. “does not require that the offender use or threaten to use any force or violence in order to commit the crime of robbery by sudden snatching. In fact, no force whatsoever is required 'beyond that effort necessary to obtain possession of the money or other property'”
    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.