308 So. 2d 32 - State v. Dinsmore’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 2018
11 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 Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction of Orange Cty. · Cline v. Frink Dairy Co. · Brock v. Hardie · Locklin v. Pridgeon · 55 So. 2d 559 - Hearn 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No member of any state, county, or municipal governmental board, commission, or agency who is present at any meeting of any such body at which an official decision, ruling, or other official act is to be taken or adopted may abstain from voting in regard to any such decision, ruling, or act, and a vote shall be recorded or counted for each such member present, except when, with respect to any such member, there is or appears to be a possible conflict of interest under the provisions of § 112.311, § 112.313, § 112.314, § 112.315 or § 112.316. In such cases said member shall comply with the disclosure requirements of § 112.313. (Emphasis supplied)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is unlawful for any commissioned or other officer of this state, or for any officer elected or otherwise of any county or incorporated town or city therein, to bid or enter into, or be in any way interested in, a contract for the working of any public road or street, the construction or building of any bridge, the erecting or building of any house, or for the performance of any other public work in which the said officer was a party to the letting, and any person who violates the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in § 775.082 or § 775.083.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"When exercising its power to declare an offense punishable, the Legislature must inform our citizens with reasonable precision what acts are prohibited. There must be provided an ascertainable standard of guilt, a barometer of conduct must be established, so that no person will be forced to act at his peril. Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction of Orange County, Florida, 368 U.S. 278 , 82 S.Ct. 275 , 7 L.Ed.2d 285 ; Locklin v. Pridgeon, 158 Fla. 737 , 30 So.2d 102 (1947); State [ex rel. Lee] v. Buchanan, 191 So.2d 33, 336 (Fla. 1966)."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wershow
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.