86 So. 3d 1225 - Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
March 2014
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 835 So. 2d 259 - State v. Carter · 854 So. 2d 744 - Anthony v. State · 601 So. 2d 245 - Pic N'Save v. Dept. of Business Reg. · 54 So. 3d 1020 - Ortiz 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In broadly declaring all terms of probation “serious,” the trial court seems to have believed revocation was automatically appropriate because a curfew violation had been proven. The trial judge made no findings on willfulness or sub-stantiality other than his blanket assertion that all curfew violations are “extremely serious.” This was an abuse of discretion because the trial court revoked [the probationer’s] probation without addressing the violation in the context of his case.”
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.