Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 760 So. 2d 89 - Maddox v. State · 761 So. 2d 1015 - Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.111(e) & 3.800 · 850 So. 2d 452 - Brannon v. State · 696 So. 2d 1103 - Amend. to Fla. Rules of Appellate Proc. · 786 So. 2d 28 - Harvey 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . . . In discussing the use of rule 3.800(b)(2), the supreme court identified various”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Beasley v. State · EDP v. State“ his constitutional right to a public sentencing hearingbut that, unlike Jackson, he properly raised the issue in a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. We agree, however, with the reasoning in the concurring opinion in Jackson , by Judge Stringer, who disagreed with the majority's assertion that this type of error could have been preserved by means of a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. The concurring opinion first notes that: The court commentary to the rule defines”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Beasley v. State“lack of representation at sentencing violates due process is a claim of sentencing error and therefore should have been preserved for appeal as required by rule 9.140(e).”
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.