Martin v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 288 So. 2d 490 - Bernhardt v. State (1974), Matthews v. State (1985)
2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 140 So. 2d 597 - State Ex Rel. Roberts v. Cochran · 186 So. 2d 520 - McNeely v. State · Bronson v. State · 207 So. 2d 52 - Roy v. State · 155 So. 2d 646 - Pickman 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The question here is whether a defendant probationer can, with impunity, engage in a criminal course of conduct (or for that matter any course of conduct which is essentially contrary to good behavior) during the interval between the date of an order of probation and some subsequent date when the probationary term is to commence. We think not. To hold otherwise would make a mockery of the very philosophy underlying the concept of probation, namely, that given a second chance to live within the rules of society and the law of the land, one will prove that he will thereafter do so and become a useful member of society. [Citation omitted]. Although the statute empowers the court to revoke probation when a probationer has violated a condition of his probation in a material respect, the power to revoke probation is an inherent power of the trial court, [citation omitted] which may be exercised at any time upon the court determining that the probationer has violated the law. [Citation omitted]. Under the exercise of such inherent power, the court can revoke an order of probation, the term of which has not yet commenced, should the court determine that the defendant probationer has been guilty of misconduct occurring subsequent to the entry of the order of probation." 243 So.2d at 190-191 . (Emphasis ours).”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage“it appears to the court ... that the defendant is not likely again to engage in a criminal course of conduct and that the ends of justice and the welfare of society do not require that the defendant presently suffer the penalty imposed by law.”
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.