710 So. 2d 1041 - Crooks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 25 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williamson v. DEPT. OF HIGHWAY SAFETY · 935 So. 2d 532 - State, Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Jones

2. “Because the record does not establish how far into the right-hand emergency lane Mr. Crooks drove on any of the three occasions, there is no basis to state that he was outside his "practicable" lane. Even if he was briefly outside this margin of error, there is no objective evidence suggesting that Mr. Crooks failed to ascertain that his movements could be made with safety. Section 316.089 is similar to section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1995), governing the use of turn signals, in that a violation cannot occur in isolation but requires evidence that the driving pattern created a reasonable safety concern. See State v. Riley, 638 So.2d 507 (Fla.1994). No such evidence exists in this case.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Phillips, Unpublished Decision (12-4-2006) · 831 So. 2d 1241 - Jordan v. State

3. “does not occur in isolation, but requires evidence that the driver's conduct created a reasonable safety concern”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 264 So. 3d 1183 - MELISSA PETERSON v. STATE OF FLORIDA