334 So. 2d 289 - Chukes v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Appellant next complains that the state adduced no proof whatsoever to show that imposition of sentence under 775.084 was necessary for the protection of the public from further criminal activity by appellant. It is quite clear that not every subsequent felony offender must automatically be sentenced as a recidivist under 775.084, F.S. 1975. A subsequent felony offender may be sentenced as a recidivist only if the court makes various findings in accordance with 775.084. Such findings must be based upon some evidence. Without such evidence in the record to justify the court's findings, a defendant's right to appellate review would be effectively stifled... . We think the invocation of such statutes requires the evidence relied upon by the trial court for the enhanced sentence be produced in open court so that the defendant has an opportunity to rebut the state's contention. See Specht v. Patterson, 386 U.S. 605 , 87 S.Ct. 1209 , 18 L.Ed.2d 326 (1967)."”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Eichhorn v. State · 362 So. 2d 425 - Grey v. State

2. “is necessary for the protection of the public from further criminal activity by the defendant... .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Phipps v. State · 392 So. 2d 277 - Moore v. State

3. “requires the evidence relied upon by the trial court for the enhanced sentence be produced in open court so that the defendant has an opportunity to rebut the state's contention. See Specht v. Patterson ...”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 376 So. 2d 47 - Adams v. State