J.R. v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The State has failed to present any evidence of a relationship between the appellant's battery upon the victim and the victim's loss of his sneakers. Although there may have been evidence, no evidence was presented and the trial judge ordered restitution without competent substantial evidence to support the award.... Section 775.089 contemplates an evidentiary hearing when there is a dispute as to restitution. Appellant objected below to the imposition of restitution and he was entitled to a hearing where the State would have the burden of proving a significant relationship between the offense and the loss. Accordingly, the order of restitution is hereby set aside and the cause remanded for a hearing on the restitution issue.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. S.M. v. State · 881 So. 2d 78 - SM v. State

2. “Interpreting this statute, the court in J.R. v. State, 857 So.2d 983, 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), stated that the general rule is that a juvenile may be ordered to pay restitution”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 881 So. 2d 78 - SM v. State

3. “for any damage or loss caused by the child's offense....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 881 So. 2d 78 - SM v. State