Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 377 So. 2d 663 - Cilento v. State

377 So. 2d 663 - Cilento v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
3
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently August 2014

20 state decisions

8019791980199020002010decided

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 United States v. Carolene Products Co. · Barrett v. United States · Bassett Furniture Industries, Inc. v. Bravman · Borden's Farm Products Co. v. Baldwin · Olsen v. State of Nebraska Western Reference & Bond Association

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

  1. “Through his plea of nolo contendere, [the defendant] has conceded that he did in fact so sell or deliver quaaludes. It appears clear to us that such conduct constitutes a violation of 891.13(l)(a). The admitted facts do form an accurate basis for the charging of this felony. Status as a physician does not in some way immunize one from charges of selling. Rather, whether the physician’s or other individual’s conduct amounts to selling or merely dispensing is a function of the particular facts of the case. [The defendant] argues that this result is irrational in that it is susceptible to both felony and misdemeanor penalties, to be finally determined at the discretion of the prosecutor. The fact that certain conduct might violate more than one criminal provision does not necessarily render it invalid. Fayerweather v. State, 332 So.2d 21 (Fla.1976). [The de fendant], as a physician, is capable of violating either or both of the provisions, 893.13(1) and 893.13(2).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Section 893.13, Florida Statutes (1975), which defines “prohibited acts” under the controlled substances law, does not explicitly cover the conduct of a medical doctor who issues a prescription for a controlled substance outside the course of his professional practice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “A statute should be construed so as to give effect to each and all of its provisions.”
    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.