Brannon v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 760 So. 2d 89 - Maddox v. State · 393 So. 2d 540 - Tascano v. State · 761 So. 2d 1015 - Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.111(e) & 3.800 · 322 So. 2d 473 - Benyard v. Wainwright · 786 So. 2d 28 - Harvey 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether the concept of fundamental sentencing error, as discussed in Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla.2000), applies to defendants who could have availed themselves of the procedural mechanism of the most recent amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) set forth in Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.111(e) and 3.800 and Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h), 9.140, and 9.600, 761 So.2d 1015 (Fla.1999)? Where the district court previously ruled that a sentencing issue is fundamental error, the initial brief was filed after the effective date of rule 3.800(b)(2), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, but before the Florida Supreme Court decided Maddox v. State , does Maddox preclude the district court from ruling on the issue as a matter of fundamental error?”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.