Brandon Stapler v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 634 So. 2d 607 - Novaton v. State · 618 So. 2d 734 - Biller v. State · 176 So. 3d 914 - State of Florida v. Dean Alden Shelley · Shelley v. State · Pinder 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The State asserts that because Shelley's three separate uses of computer devices on the date charged in the information would have supported three separate soliciting charges, the soliciting charge is not subsumed by the traveling charge. We are not persuaded by this argument. The State only charged one use of computer devices to solicit, and that charge was based on a solicitation occurring on the same date as the traveling offense. We find no legal basis to deny a double jeopardy challenge based on uncharged conduct simply because it could have been charged. But we acknowledge that convictions for both soliciting and traveling may be legally imposed in cases in which the State has charged and proven separate uses of computer devices to solicit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dygart 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.