Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 742 So. 2d 261 - JMJ v. State

742 So. 2d 261 - JMJ v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
June 2002
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 685 So. 2d 773 - Amend. to Fla. Rules of Appellate Proc. · 689 So. 2d 1066 - State v. Hunter · 694 So. 2d 720 - IT v. State · 675 So. 2d 1374 - Amendments to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(g) & Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 · 688 So. 2d 1027 - GRA 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he juvenile delinquency system is different from the adult criminal system. Among other differences is the fact that, in the juvenile delinquency system rehabilitation is the principal focus, while in the adult criminal system punishment is the principal focus. In addition, established principles of statutory construc tion militate against the conclusion that the legislature intended that section 924.051 apply to juvenile delinquency proceedings. Section 924.051 was added by the legislature to chapter 924.... Appeals in juvenile delinquency proceedings are addressed in section 39.069, Florida Statutes .... Section 39.069 appears to have been intended by the legislature to deal exhaustively with the subject of appeals in juvenile delinquency proceedings.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “applying section 924.051 [to juvenile proceedings] will result in depriving the juvenile of any opportunity to correct the trial court’s error because there is no procedure applicable to juvenile delinquency proceedings which is similar to that created by the supreme court when it amended Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) to permit motions to correct sentencing errors, Amendments to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(g) and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800, 675 So.2d 1374 (Fla.1996); nor is there any procedure for collateral review in juvenile delinquency proceedings which is similar to that afforded to adults convicted of crimes by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Thus, juveniles who wish to challenge the terms of a disposition order will be left without any means to do so. It seems to us that such a result would pose serious constitutional problems. Depriving a juvenile of the right to review in such a case might well run afoul of article V, section 4(b), of the Florida Constitution. See Amendments to the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, 685 So.2d 773 (Fla.1996) (the right to appeal is guaranteed by article V, section 4(b), of the Florida Constitution). In addition, it seems to us that such a result would raise serious questions under the due process and equal protection clauses of both the state and federal constitutions.”
    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.