Sampson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 state decisions

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

1. “"Accordingly, if, upon examination of the motion, it is found defective in form or substance and insufficient to state a prima facie case entitling the prisoner to relief, summary disposition is proper. Savage v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 156 So.2d 566 ; King v. State, Fla. App. 1963, 157 So.2d 440 . Similarly, if upon examination, the motion is sufficient but the `files and records in the case' conclusively refute the allegations or otherwise conclusively preclude relief, summary denial is proper. Absent one of these requisites, summary denial is improper and the provisions of the Rule for notice, hearing and determination of the issue must be followed. King v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 157 So.2d 440 ; Crosby v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 157 So.2d 867 ."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bryant v. State · 231 So. 2d 205 - Lawson v. State

2. “"Unless the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall cause notice thereof to be served upon the prosecuting attorney of the court, grant a prompt hearing thereon, determine the issues and make findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect thereto."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 504 So. 2d 795 - Cintron v. State · 231 So. 2d 205 - Lawson v. State

3. “****** “[4] A cursory examination of the numerous allegations in the motion reveals that many are merely conclusions of the movant unsupported by factual allegations and are, accordingly insufficient and improper. The circumstances under which these motions may be drawn have prompted liberal treatment and ‘broad latitude in compliance with requirements as to form and detail,’ but factual allegations in support of any basis for relief advanced are necessary. Roy v. Wainwright, Fla.1963, 151 So.2d 825 . Webster v. State, Fla.App.1963, 156 So.2d 890 . A motion advancing mere conclusions as grounds for relief may be properly dismissed. Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1 , 83 S.Ct. 1068 , 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (3963). * * *” [Emphasis added] ******”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smith v. State