515 So. 2d 738 - Tal-Mason v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably 516 So. 2d 249 - PALM HARBOR SP. FIRE CONTROL D. v. Kelly (1987), Gay v. Singletary (1997)
57 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 394 So. 2d 981 - Miami Dolphins, Ltd. v. Metro. Dade County · 302 So. 2d 737 - Sarasota County v. Barg · 398 So. 2d 815 - Pennington v. State · State v. Bedgood · State v. MacKley
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Tal-Mason clearly had no choice when he was confined in a state mental institution. He entered into no agreement with the state to obtain an early release from confinement or from any other punishment less restrictive than jail time. Rather than increasing his liberty, Tal-Mason's confinement was in the strictest sense a complete deprivation of liberty. He was in the total custody and control of the state at all times. And while his confinement involved psychological treatment, the primary purpose of both the treatment and the detention was to hold Tal-Mason until such time as he became competent to stand trial, if ever. Thus, his coercive commitment to a state institution was indistinguishable from pretrial detention in a `jail,' as that term is understood in common and legal usage."”
10 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. JIS v. State · Roberts v. State“... Our courts already have tacitly recognized that a detainee must be granted credit for time served prior to conviction in any institution serving as the functional equivalent of a county jail.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Petscher v. State · JIS v. State“[p]robationary conditions are more in the nature of a contract between the probationer and the state. The defendant clearly has a choice to reject those conditions, albeit at the risk of continued detention in jail or prison.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.