845 So. 2d 282 - Brazill v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Because section 985.225 implicates no fundamental constitutional right, the applicable test for reviewing a substantive due process challenge to the statute is the rational-basis standard of review. See Shapiro v. State, 696 So.2d 1321, 1326-27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Under this standard, a presumption of constitutionality attaches to a statute; the burden is on the party challenging the statute to establish that the statutory proscription lacks a rational relationship to a legitimate governmental interest. * * * Section 985.225 ... provides treatment as an adult for those offenses serious enough to be punishable by life imprisonment or death.... It is not unreasonable for the legislature to treat children who commit serious crimes as adults in order to protect societal goals.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 864 So. 2d 44 - Tate v. State

2. “A plain reading of section 775.087(2)(a)3. indicates that the minimum term that may be imposed ranges from twenty-five years to life imprisonment. The precise length of the mandatory minimum is a discretionary sentencing decision of the trial court.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Yasin v. State

3. “that his due process rights were violated because he was denied the `rehabilitative aspect of juvenile court' solely because the state decided to procure an indictment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 864 So. 2d 44 - Tate v. State