821 So. 2d 1206 - State v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on 786 So. 2d 1173 - Carter v. State · 177 So. 2d 193 - Kippy Corporation v. Colburn · 236 So. 2d 1 - Shelby Mutual Ins. Co. of Shelby, Ohio v. Pearson · 819 So. 2d 123 - State v. Goldberg · Bortz v. Bortz
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is simply no rule or statutory authority for a trial court to reconsider the merits of an unappealed final order denying post conviction relief some six months after its rendition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he movant may file a motion for rehearing of any order denying a motion under this rule within 15 days of the date of service of the order.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A challenge to an underlying conviction may be raised on direct appeal or in a Rule 3.850 motion; it is not cognizable by way of Rule 3.800.”
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.