Howarth v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “. . . [t]he function of a writ of error coram nobis is to correct errors of fact, not errors of law. The facts upon which the petition is based must have been unknown by the trial court or by counsel at the time of the trial, and it must appear that defendant or his counsel could not have known them by the used of diligence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 919 So. 2d 566 - Medina v. State

2. “even though Harris labeled his petition as one for writ of error coram nobis, all of his allegations pertain to ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with pleas entered on December 8, 1987. The proper pleading which Harris should have filed was a motion under rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal procedure.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 919 So. 2d 566 - Medina v. State

3. “. . . are not errors of fact that are recognizable in a traditional petition for writ or error coram nobis.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 919 So. 2d 566 - Medina v. State