Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 524 So. 2d 1118 - State v. Urf

524 So. 2d 1118 - State v. Urf’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
January 1992
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 336 So. 2d 93 - Johnson 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.

  1. “We find no departure from the essential requirements of law in the court's agreement to seal its own records. See e.g., Johnson v. State, 336 So.2d 93 (Fla. 1976). However, we do agree that the court exceeded its authority in ordering the sealing by law enforcement agencies of arrest and criminal history records, because Urf, having been adjudged guilty of the offenses in question, did not qualify for such extraordinary relief. §§ 943.058(2) and 943.058(3), Fla. Stat. (1987). Accordingly the petition for writ of certiorari is granted in part and denied in part....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.