Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 577 SO2D 1388 - Wilcoxson v. State

Wilcoxson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
November 1995
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 506 So. 2d 1039 - In re Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 6C(1) · 573 So. 2d 306 - State v. Smith · 570 So. 2d 1301 - Florida Bar Re: Amendments to Rules Regulating the Florida Bar-Chapter 6 (Legal Specialization & Education Programs) · 552 So. 2d 914 - Rojas v. State · 557 So. 2d 34 - Slaughter 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Appellant also argues that the trial court erred in departing from the recommended sentence of twelve to seventeen years incarceration when sentencing appellant to twenty years. In its written reasons for departure, the trial court stated that departure was based on the defendant’s escalating pattern of criminal conduct during the past three and one-half decades. The trial court did not specify of what that conduct consisted, and such omission is erroneous. In Davis v. State, 517 So.2d 670 , 672 n. 1 (Fla.1987), the court stated that Rule 3.701(d)(ll), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, requires that departure sentences be accompanied by a written statement “delineating” the reasons for departure. The court emphasized that reasons supporting departure should be explicitly listed and then followed, if necessary, by the relevant facts used to support the reason in order to facilitate appellate review. Such an explicit statement with factual support was not provided in the instant case.”
    2 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.