593 So. 2d 180 - Dugger v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently October 2016
17 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 562 So. 2d 687 - Waldrup v. Dugger · 348 So. 2d 312 - Sullivan v. Askew · Dugger v. Rodrick · In Re Advisory Opinion of the Governor · 566 So. 2d 819 - Williams v. Dugger
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Florida, a law or its equivalent violates the prohibition against ex post facto laws if two conditions are met: (a) it is retrospective in effect; and (b) it diminishes a substantial substantive right the party would have enjoyed under the law existing at the time of the alleged offense.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Trotter v. State · State v. A.C.“[I]t is too simplistic to say that an ex post facto violation can occur only with regard to substantive law, not procedural law. Clearly, some procedural matters have a substantive effect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hooper 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.