512 So. 2d 164 - DeBock v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An attorney as an officer of the Court and a member of the third branch of government occupies a unique position in our society. Because attorneys are in a position where members of the public must place their trust, property and liberty, and at times even their lives, in a member of the bar, society rightfully demands that an attorney must possess a fidelity to truth and honesty that is beyond reproach. When an attorney breaches this duty, the public is harmed. Not only is the individual citizen harmed by the unethical practitioner, all of society suffers when confidence in our system of law and justice is eroded by the unethical conduct of an officer of the Court. To protect the public the bar is mandated to inquire into an attorney’s conduct when even the appearance of impropriety exists. For these reasons, the vast weight of judicial authority recognizes that bar discipline exists to protect the public, and not to “punish” the lawyer.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cillo v. Florida Bar (In Re Cillo) · 753 So. 2d 555 - The Florida Bar v. Temmer

2. “This burden of proof, which we reaffirm as appropriate, is not limited to a negation or taint; rather, it imposes on the prosecution the affirmative duty to prove that the evidence it proposes to use is derived from a legitimate source wholly independent of the compelled testimony. * * * * * * This statute, which operates after a witness has given incriminatory testimony, affords the same protection by assuring that the compelled testimony can in no way lead to the infliction of criminal penalties. The statute, like the Fifth Amendment, grants neither pardon nor amnesty. Both the statute and the Fifth Amendment allow the government to prosecute using evidence from legitimate independent sources.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 710 So. 2d 729 - Zile v. State

3. “We note in passing that many remedial statutes, designed to benefit or protect the public, have 'penal' aspects; this does not alter their basic purpose and transform them into penal measures.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 902 So. 2d 296 - Blankfeld v. Richmond Health Care, Inc.