State v. Earl’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 2002
11 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 State v. J. T. S. · State v. West · Gonzalez v. State · 470 So. 2d 1387 - DKD 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It appears, from a consideration of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the dismissal, that it was the Court's intention, in dismissing the case, to "screen out" a case that was viewed by the Court as one that was so weak so as to be unworthy of the time and effort, of the Court and the prosecutor, that would necessarily have to be expended if the prosecution of the case were to continue.... The problem arises, however, when the taking of such actions by the Court invades and interferes with the proper exercise of prosecutorial discretion that is the sole responsibility of the prosecutor. The strength of the State's case, and the likelihood of the State obtaining a conviction after a prosecution of a particular case, are properly considered by the Court in certain circumstances, such as when the Court has to make a determination concerning the pre-trial release status of a particular defendant.... Neither the provisions of that [pre-trial release] rule nor the provisions of any other rule contained within the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure provide for the Court to participate with the State in making "screening" decisions as to which cases should or should not be prosecuted. The prosecutor, and only the prosecutor, has the responsibility and the authority of making decisions relating to the allocation of prosecutorial resources. Once the prosecutor has made a determination that a particular case should be prosecuted, it then becomes the responsibility of the Co”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Pope · State v. King“The trial court may not try or determine factual issues in a summary judgment proceeding; nor consider either the weight of the conflicting evidence or the credibility of the witnesses in determining whether there exists a genuine issue of material facts [sic]; nor substitute itself for the trier of the fact and determine controverted issues of fact.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the State's case by making its own determination of whether or not the case should be prosecuted. See State v. Earl, 545 So.2d 415 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). As this court has previously stated: It appears, from a consideration of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the dismissal, that it was the Court's intention, in dismissing the case, to”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Pope
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.