913 So. 2d 69 - State v. Schuck’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
December 2007
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Ornelas v. United States · 803 So. 2d 598 - Connor v. State · 596 So. 2d 442 - Doctor v. State · 870 So. 2d 816 - Romero v. State · 901 So. 2d 155 - Hilton 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“and when the equipment does not meet this standard, a traffic officer can cite the driver for the equipment violation under section 316.610. Pursuant to section 361.6105, the person cited can mitigate the civil fine by getting the defect corrected. As the Fourth District wrote in Schuck: Section 316.610(1) expressly gives a police officer the authority to require the driver of a vehicle to stop and submit the vehicle to an inspection if the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle is”
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.