903 So. 2d 954 - King v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A]fter 1998, a parent who spanked a child with such force or repetition as to cause significant bruises or welts could be considered to have abused the child under chapter 39. Even if the Department of Children and Families did not initiate a dependency proceeding, the State could charge the parent with contributing to the dependency of a minor [a misdemeanor under section 827.04] for such conduct.... [I]f a parent can be charged with the misdemeanor offense under section 827.04 when a spanking results in significant welts, the legislature intended more serious beatings that do not result in permanent disability or permanent disfigurement to be treated as simple child abuse under section 827.03(1).”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Chisolm v. State · 953 So. 2d 33 - Julius v. State

2. “significant welts and bruises on [the child's] buttocks as a result of the paddling, but [the injuries] did not require medical treatment.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 953 So. 2d 33 - Julius v. State · 979 So. 2d 365 - State v. Lanier

3. “an intentional act that could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to the child.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 979 So. 2d 365 - State v. Lanier