Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 311 So. 2d 787 - Collins v. Wainwright

311 So. 2d 787 - Collins v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
April 1999
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 1999

9 state decisions

40197519801990decided

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 Garrity v. State of New Jersey · Bram v. United States · 272 So. 2d 65 - In Re Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure · 283 So. 2d 553 - McDole v. State · 304 So. 2d 119 - Wilson 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Appellant was convicted and sentenced in November 1971, at which time there was no rule requiring a presentence investigation. Rule 3.710, RCrP, became effective February 1, 1973 ( 272 So.2d 65 ). Appellant suggests that we should apply the rule as it exists at the time of the appeal, citing as analogous authority our decision in Gallagher v. State, Fla.App. 1974, 300 So.2d 299 . See also Joins v. State, Fla.App. 1974, 287 So.2d 742 . We accept appellant's suggestion. Accordingly, while the sentencing procedure adopted by the trial judge was appropriate at the time, its appropriateness has been changed by a change in the law between the conviction and sentence and the appearance of the cause before this court. The rule applicable to this cause now requires that on this record a presentence investigation must be considered prior to imposition of sentence, since that record does not demonstrate that appellant had ever been convicted of a prior felony." Id. at 788-789 .”
    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.