Otis v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
January 2016
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 503 So. 2d 803 - Wetz v. State · 451 So. 2d 743 - Neal v. State · 440 So. 2d 297 - Groseclose v. State · McFee v. State · 697 So. 2d 777 - Coleman 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is understandable why two crimes originating out of the same nucleus of operative facts should be counted as one crime for evaluating whether one should receive an enhanced penalty for his continual involvement in criminal activity. If the purpose of the statute is to deter subsequent criminal activity, it would be patently unfair to count multiple crimes — arising out of a common nucleus of operative facts and committed at the same time by an individual during one foray into criminal activity — as separate crimes because neither of the multiple crimes constitutes subsequent involvement in criminal activity. Such an interpretation is consistent with the laudable purpose of the statute: to stiffen the penalty for repeat offenders, not for current offenders who commit several crimes during their one foray into criminal activity.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the court has often held that a party waives any and all claims regarding the composition of his jury if he fails to raise an objection before the jury is sworn.”
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.