237 So. 2d 139 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 34 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"`To make a statute sufficiently certain to comply with constitutional requirements it is not necessary that it furnish detailed plans and specifications of the acts or conduct prohibited... .'"”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Davenport · State v. Williams

2. “"Whether the words of the Florida statute are sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to its provisions what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties is the test by which the statute must stand or fall, because, as was stated in the opinion above mentioned, `a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law.' "Such seems to be the test approved by the Supreme Court of the United States. Citation of authorities as to what may be considered the exact meaning of the phrase `so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning,' so that certain conduct may be considered within or outside the true meaning of that phrase, or what language of a statute may lie within or without it, would be of little aid to us. "We must apply our own knowledge with which observation and experience have supplied us in determining whether words employed by the statute are reasonably clear or not in indicating the legislative purpose, so that a person who may be liable to the penalties of the act may know that he is within its provisions or not."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Mayhew · 49 Fla. Supp. 1 - State v. Brayman

3. ““There are many actions of motorists in the operation of motor vehicles that may be expressly described and forbidden by the legislature, such as speed limits in various areas and under varying conditions, parking regulations, adequate lights, brakes, and matters of that kind; but the lawmakers cannot anticipate or provide for every eventulity that might arise in the operation of a motor vehicle on the public highways that might endanger life and property.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Williams · 906 So. 2d 1013 - Sult v. State