41 So. 3d 1041 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
February 2016
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Blockburger v. United States · 3 So. 3d 1067 - Valdes v. State · 780 So. 2d 17 - Gordon v. State · 2 So. 3d 132 - State v. Meshell · 39 So. 3d 372 - Roberts 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whoever, in the course of one criminal transaction or episode, commits an act or acts which constitute one or more separate criminal offenses, upon conviction and adjudication of guilt, shall be sentenced separately for each criminal offense; and the sentencing judge may order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively. For the purposes of this subsection, offenses are separate if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Roughton v. State
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.