Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 537 So. 2d 669 - Dewberry v. State

537 So. 2d 669 - Dewberry v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
July 1989
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 288 So. 2d 490 - Bernhardt v. State · 500 So. 2d 526 - State v. Pentaude · 519 So. 2d 719 - Young v. State · 440 So. 2d 612 - Lumbermens Mut. Casualty Co. v. Ceballos · Lambert 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. “WHERE A TRIAL JUDGE FINDS THAT THE UNDERLYING REASONS FOR VIOLATION OF COMMUNITY CONTROL OR PROBATION CONSTITUTE MORE THAN A MINOR INFRACTION AND ARE SUFFICIENTLY EGREGIOUS, MAY HE DEPART FROM THE PRESUMPTIVE GUIDELINES RANGE AND IMPOSE AN APPROPRIATE SENTENCE WITHIN THE STATUTORY LIMIT EVEN THOUGH THE DEFENDANT HAS NOT BEEN "CONVICTED" OF THE CRIMES WHICH THE TRIAL JUDGE CONCLUDED CONSTITUTED A VIOLATION OF HIS COMMUNITY CONTROL OR PROBATION?”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
    e.g. Dewberry v. State
  2. “include factors relating to the instant offenses for which convictions have not been obtained.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. 545 So. 2d 838 - Lambert 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.