717 So. 2d 609 - Mitchell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
November 2006
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 662 So. 2d 408 - Melecio v. State · 661 So. 2d 353 - Miller v. State · 484 So. 2d 1232 - Howard v. State · 696 So. 2d 444 - Peppers 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“During the initial interview at the agency, the defendant contracted to enter the program and was instructed that under the contract he could only miss three sessions to be in compliance with the program rules. The defendant was further instructed that if he had to miss a class he was required to call 24 hours in advance to inform the staff. The defendant acknowledged that his first class was scheduled in May. Thus, there is record evidence that the defendant was to start the program immediately after being placed on probation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lawson v. State
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.