633 So. 2d 72 - Parker v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently October 2012
16 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 515 So. 2d 161 - Carawan v. State · 630 So. 2d 521 - Hale v. State · 438 So. 2d 1 - Palmer v. State · Daniels v. State · 491 So. 2d 1120 - Murray 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The task of determining when a criminal episode can be denominated "single" or "separate" for purposes of consecutive minimum mandatory sentencing is not an easy one. There is no "bright line" rule to which we can refer. As the above cases demonstrate, there have been attempts to loosely categorize criminal episodes by focusing on the nature of the offenses, the time sequence in which they were committed, and the place they were committed, see, e.g., Murray [ [2] ] and State v. Boatwright, 559 So.2d 210 (Fla. 1990), as well as by focusing on whether there was a single victim or multiple victims, e.g., Woods. [ [3] ] Palmer [ [4] ] indicates that when making this determination, whether separate sentences may be imposed for separate offenses occurring in the same criminal transaction or episode under subsection 775.021(4) is neither controlling nor relevant. Thus, when we stated in Woods that the imposition of consecutive minimum mandatory sentences is justified "where two separate and distinct criminal offenses have occurred," 615 So.2d at 198, it would be misleading to overlook the remainder of that discussion where we defined "separate offenses" in terms of separate victims, separate locations, and temporal breaks between the incidents, not in terms of separate statutory elements. Id. Obviously, in determining whether a series of criminal events constitutes a single criminal episode or separate criminal episodes, the focus must be directed to the facts of each individual cas”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the First District, in Parker v. State, 633 So.2d 72, 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), recently stated: The task of determining when a criminal episode can be denominated”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“for purposes of consecutive minimum mandatory sentencing is not an easy one. There is no”
1 later decision 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.