Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 732 SO2D 74 - State v. Stewart

State v. Stewart’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
February 2010
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 363 So. 2d 458 - State v. Johnson · 396 So. 2d 297 - State v. Duncan · City of Baton Rouge v. Bourgeois · 458 So. 2d 1037 - State v. Milson · State v. Morgan

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.

  1. “even though none of the delay can be attributed to the defendant, no prejudice can be found because he could not have expected a less severe sentence. Like the defendant in State v. Dorsey , he cannot not [sic] show that he suffered any prejudice by the delay in sentencing.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the trial courts had some discretion in determining the length of the sentence to be imposed. . . .”
    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.