513 So. 2d 689 - Wayne v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “defendant, having already been sentenced once, cannot constitutionally be sentenced a second time for the same offense merely because he has violated the probation appended to the lawful sentence of confinement. Constitutional double jeopardy prohibits [petitioner] from being sentenced a second time for the same burglary and he must be released as to that charge.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 531 So. 2d 160 - State v. Wayne · 529 So. 2d 736 - Hankey v. State

2. “and should not be confused. Actually, each is legally the antithesis of the other. Further confusion of these concepts was assured by the language in the committee note to the sentencing guidelines (Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(12)) to the effect that when a split sentence is imposed the incarcerative portion shall not exceed the maximum of the range, and the implication therein that a split sentence can be any combination of state prison and probation supervision. This implication is reinforced by the sentence form in Rule 3.986 which misleadingly provides for a”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 519 So. 2d 1154 - McKinley v. State

3. “[p]rovides for what is erroneously presumed to be a second method of imposing a `split' sentence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 526 So. 2d 159 - Franklin v. State