Bethune v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Trial counsel need only advise a defendant of direct consequences of a plea. See State v. Ginebra, 511 So.2d 960 (Fla. 1987), superseded on other grounds by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172; State v. De Abreu, 613 So.2d 453, 453 (1993) (holding " In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 536 So.2d 992 (Fla.1988) ... supersede[s] Ginebra to the extent of any inconsistency"). Counsel is not required to inform his [or her] client of potential sentence-enhancing consequences of his [or her] plea because it is a collateral consequence. See Rhodes v. State, 701 So.2d 388 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Thus, failure to do so cannot substantiate an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Id. at 389 . Similarly, as a collateral consequence, use of a conviction to enhance a future sentence does not render a plea involuntary. See Sherwood v. State, 743 So.2d 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Therefore, the trial court's order is affirmed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Major v. State

2. “In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 536 So.2d 992 (Fla.1988) ... supersede[s] Ginebra to the extent of any inconsistency”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Major v. State

3. “`Trial counsel need only advise a defendant of direct consequences of a plea.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 831 So. 2d 716 - Cella v. State