Coupe v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Anders v. California · 556 So. 2d 1114 - In RE ORDER OF FIRST DIST. CT. OF APPEAL REGARDING BRIEF FILED IN FORRESTER v. State · Forrester v. State · 538 So. 2d 545 - Courtesy Corp. v. Holland · 538 So. 2d 544 - Christie 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“what, if any, issues may be raised by counsel for appellant in an initial brief without losing appellant's right to the Anders procedure, including permission for appellant to serve his own pro se brief and an examination of the entire record by the appellate court for the existence of reversible error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“accept briefs in accordance with Anders which find no error as to the trial or plea proceedings, but which identify sentencing errors, except where it is argued that the trial court's reasons for departing from the sentencing guidelines were not legally sufficient.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“we believe the arguments of counsel are so substantive that Anders review cannot be justified.”
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.