515 So. 2d 196 - Demps v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently October 2018
21 state decisions
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 Caldwell v. Mississippi · Demps v. Florida · 462 So. 2d 1074 - Demps v. State · 395 So. 2d 501 - Demps v. State · Demps 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A motion to vacate a sentence which exceeds the limits provided by law may be filed at any time. No other motion shall be filed or considered pursuant to this rule if filed more than two years after the judgment and sentence become final unless it alleges (1) the facts upon which the claim is predicated were unknown to the movant or his attorney and could not have been ascertained by the exercise of due diligence, or, (2) the fundamental constitutional right asserted was not established within the period provided for herein and has been held to apply retroactively. Any person whose judgment and sentence became final prior to January 1, 1985, shall have until January 1, 1987, to file a motion in accordance with this rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Johnson v. State“The [public records] act was equally available ... prior to January 1, 1987, the cut off date for post-conviction relief in the instant case. Rule 3.850 bars an untimely petition based on information previously ascertainable through the exercise of due diligence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“not represent a sufficient change in the law to overcome a procedural bar,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cave 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.