Ey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The fact of the plea subjects the defendant to the potential for subsequent sentence enhancement on another offense. The defendant with knowledge both of his plea and of the other offense he committed before entering his plea can ascertain within two years of the plea whether that plea could subject him to enhancement of any subsequent sentence. Therefore, we hold that a defendant’s claim that counsel erroneously advised that a plea would not affect the subsequent sentence of another crime committed before the plea must be filed within two years after the conviction based on the plea is final.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Gusow v. State

2. “[t]he trial and appellate courts shall apply these pleading requirements to any currently pending cases alleging this claim and permit defendants failing to meet them to amend the claim, if they can do so in good faith.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 997 So. 2d 481 - MacK v. State