Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 994 SO2D 376 - Barber v. State

Barber v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
September 2012
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Lewis Director Arizona Department of Corrections v. Casey · State v. Spencer · 668 So. 2d 600 - State v. Sheffield · 801 So. 2d 906 - Downs v. Moore · 987 So. 2d 20 - Pettway v. McNeil

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

  1. “As this court has stated: “We recognize that incarcerated persons should and do have a full panoply of procedural vehicles with which to challenge the lawfulness of their incarcerations.” Hepburn v. State, 934 So.2d 515, 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Johnson v. State, 915 So.2d 682, 684 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). There is, however, no constitutional right to file a frivolous lawsuit. See Hepburn, 934 So.2d at 517-18 ; see also Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 , 353 n. 3, 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (“Depriving someone of a frivolous claim ... deprives him of nothing at all, except perhaps the punishment of ... sanctions.”). As this Court stated in Lanier v. State, 983 So.2d 658, 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), Hicks v. State, 974 So.2d 1116, 1118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), and Minor v. State, 963 So.2d 797, 799 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007), “there comes a point where enough is enough.””
    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.