State v. GT, JR.’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
March 2017
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · 338 So. 2d 584 - State v. Crosby · 428 So. 2d 449 - State v. Burkhalter · State v. Wry · 575 So. 2d 928 - State v. Moore
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“corrective action must still be taken because there is no indication in the record as to whether the defendant is aware of the sex offender registration requirements. Therefore, we remand this matter to the district court to provide appropriate written notice to the defendant of the sex offender registration requirements within ten days of the rendition of the opinion and to file written proof that the defendant received notice in the record of the proceedings.”
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.