Clark v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 531 So. 2d 161 - Poore v. State · Grant v. State · 850 So. 2d 1265 - Ashley v. State · 437 So. 2d 1079 - Forbert v. State · 985 So. 2d 985 - State v. Collins
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.
“A sentencing error may not be raised on appeal unless the alleged error has first been brought to the attention of the lower tribunal: (1) at the time of sentencing; or (2) by motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[Clark] argues, as he did in his 3.800(b)(2) motion, that when the trial court sentenced him the second time and failed to pronounce his HFO status, the trial court could not, at the third sentencing, reimpose his HFO status.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“any sentence consistent with the sentencing laws in effect on the date of the offense, even if it result[ed] in a harsher sentence.”
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.