926 So. 2d 1262 - Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
1 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 868 So. 2d 512 - State v. McCormick · 385 So. 2d 1356 - Jenkins v. State · 101 So. 2d 808 - Ansin v. Thurston · 827 So. 2d 974 - Stallworth v. Moore · 431 So. 2d 1011 - Whipple 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.
“This Court has long recognized that it lacks jurisdiction over unelaborated per curiam decisions in the context of discretionary review jurisdiction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]rticle V, section 3(b)(1) does not authorize this Court to review unelaborated per curiam decisions issued by the district court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“declaring invalid a state statute or a provision of the state constitution;””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.