689 So. 2d 1159 - Wallace v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In Wallace , the Fourth District affirmed convictions for two counts of resisting an officer with violence, notwithstanding the fact that both charges arose out of a single incident during which two different officers were involved. In a lengthy opinion, the Wallace court noted its disagreement with Pierce , apparently because it believed that, as used in section 843.01,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 711 So. 2d 1221 - Hill v. State · 724 So. 2d 1176 - Wallace v. State

2. “(b) The intent of the Legislature is to convict and sentence for each criminal offense committed in the course of one criminal episode or transaction and not to allow the principle of lenity as set forth in subsection (1) to determine legislative intent. Exceptions to this rule of construction are: 1. Offenses which require identical elements of proof. 2. Offenses which are degrees of the same offense as provided by statute. 3. Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 711 So. 2d 1221 - Hill v. State

3. “any does not define the `allowable unit of prosecution'—merely the class of officers to whom the statute's protection is intended.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 724 So. 2d 1176 - Wallace v. State