486 So. 2d 577 - Thomas v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Liepelt · Thomas v. Wainwright · 374 So. 2d 508 - Thomas v. State · 421 So. 2d 160 - Thomas 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]ll of the claims in appellant’s current motion are matters that should have been raised at trial and on appeal, that could have been raised on appeal but were not, that were presented on appeal and decided adversely to appellant’s position, that were raised and rejected in one of appellant’s previous collateral challenges, or that were inexcusably omitted from his previous rule 3.850 motion. See Adams v. State, [ 484 So.2d 1216 ] (Fla. 1986). We therefore find that the trial court was correct in denying the present motion without an evidentiary hearing. The record conclusively shows that appellant is not entitled to have the judgment or sentence vacated, set aside, or modified.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Thomas v. Wainwright
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.