Bowman v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2011
15 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 588 So. 2d 636 - Mansingh v. State · 504 So. 2d 473 - Amison v. State · Branker v. State · 525 So. 2d 467 - M.E.I. 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The purpose of restitution is to make the victim whole, not to make him better off than before the theft.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]here stolen property is recovered, the amount of restitution ordered must be offset by the salvage value of the property returned.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]ithout this evidence, the trial court was unable to properly carry out its duty to order restitution for the amount of the loss.”
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.