Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2011 S.D. 71 - State v. Waugh

State v. Waugh’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

20 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Bohr · 106 Wis. 2d 185 - State v. Hoffman · State v. Thompson · State v. Buchholz · Kostel v. Schwartz

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

  1. “[t]wo or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information in separate counts for each offense, if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors or both, are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on two or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[¶21.] When joinder is proper under SDCL 23A-6-23, "the burden of proof falls to the party opposing joinder to establish sufficient prejudice to justify severance of the joined counts." "A showing of prejudice requires more than a showing of a better chance of acquittal at a separate trial." The requisite showing of prejudice is high in order "to offset the purpose of joinder, judicial efficiency."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Any joinder of offenses is apt to involve some element of prejudice to the defendant, since a jury is likely to feel that a defendant charged with several crimes must be a bad individual who has done something wrong. However, if the notion of involuntary joinder is to retain any validity, a higher degree of preju dice, or certainty of prejudice, must be shown before relief will be in order.”
    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.