885 So. 2d 921 - State v. Joly’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
April 2007
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 760 So. 2d 89 - Maddox v. State · 850 So. 2d 1265 - Ashley v. State · 668 So. 2d 589 - State v. Hart · 674 So. 2d 123 - Justice 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.
“"a defendant has the opportunity to interpose a substantive objection to probation conditions contained in the written order even if no contemporaneous objection is made at the sentencing proceedings. Therefore, procedural due process is satisfied without the need to orally pronounce otherwise proper special probation conditions."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]his rule was grounded in procedural due process principles of notice and opportunity to be heard, because written sentencing orders are not customarily provided to defendants until after court proceedings are concluded, defendants had no opportunity to interpose contemporaneous objections to such conditions unless they were orally announced during the sentencing proceeding.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Grubb v. State
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.