State v. Tabuteau’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
September 2009
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1255 (§ 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on 944 So. 2d 208 - State v. Green · Forrest v. State · Bieger v. State
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.
“[ defendant’s claim that, but for the conviction in this case, he might be entitled to an adjustment in his immigration status is too speculative to merit relief. A state court is not a proper forum to litigate whether appellant would have received an adjustment in his immigration status. This determination is within the exclusive discretion of federal offi cials. 8 U.S.C. § 1255 (2000). Rosas [v. State, 991 So.2d 1003, 1003-04 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ruiz v. State
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.