King v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
December 2016
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 957 So. 2d 600 - Williams v. State · 500 So. 2d 592 - Keene v. State · 69 So. 3d 261 - State v. Akins · Lebron v. State · 702 So. 2d 236 - Linton 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and written sentence is a valid basis for an illegal sentence claim under rule 3.800(a). When the written sentence and oral pronouncement conflict, the oral pronouncement controls. The postconviction court is correct that [the defendant] was not entitled to the additional credit in [the later-filed case] because his bond was only revoked as to [the earlier-filed case] .... Nevertheless, the sentencing court had the discretion to award the credit on all concurrent sentences, including [the later-filed case], and the transcript clearly indicates that intent. Failure to correct the sentence now to include the award of credit would be tantamount to rescinding previously awarded jail credit. This court has repeatedly held that a trial court may not rescind jail credit previously awarded even if the initial award was improper. To do so would constitute an illegal enhancement of [the defendant’s] sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brogan
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.