969 So. 2d 238 - Brooks v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
87
cited by 87 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited
87 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · 476 So. 2d 158 - Albritton v. State · 760 So. 2d 89 - Maddox v. State · State v. Callaway · 905 So. 2d 111 - State v. Anderson
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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, when preserved for review, the error may be raised on direct appeal. Second, even if not originally preserved, "to provide defendants with a mechanism to correct sentencing errors in the trial court at the earliest opportunity" and to "give defendants a means to preserve these errors for appellate review," we amended Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) to allow defendants to file a motion to correct sentencing error even while an appeal is pending (but before the initial brief). This rule also authorizes the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing. Third, under rule 3.850, a defendant may raise a sentencing error within two years after the sentence becomes final. . . . . . . . Rule 3.800(a) provides yet a fourth avenue for asserting sentencing error. . . . Under this rule, a defendant may allege (1) that the sentence imposed is illegal; (2) that insufficient credit was awarded for time served; or (3) that the sentencing scoresheet was incorrectly calculated.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The would-have-been-imposed test ... requires an examination of the record for conclusive proof that the scoresheet error did not affect or contribute to the sentencing decision. If the reviewing court cannot determine conclusively from the record that the trial court would have imposed the same sentence despite the erroneous scoresheet ... re-sentencing is required.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Moreover, the trial court imposed a sentence well above the lowest permissible sentence—forty-eight months. While this certainly suggests that the trial court would have imposed the same sen tence using the corrected scoresheet, the record does not conclusively establish that the trial court would have imposed the same sentence ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Chambers 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.