Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 243 SO2D 595 - State v. Talavera

State v. Talavera’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
2
states following
October 2000
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently October 2000

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

701971198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Suarez v. State of Florida · 140 So. 2d 627 - Jackman v. State · 227 So. 2d 493 - Talavera v. State · 237 So. 2d 772 - Hart v. Tucker · 206 So. 2d 430 - Byrd 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “* * * * * * "... (1) the exculpatory nature of the testimony to be elicited from a codefendant; (2) is accompanied by some assurance that the codefendant is willing to testify; (3) sets out the facts indicating that the codefendant would not be willing to testify at a joint trial; (4) clearly indicates that the testimony sought from the codefendant is relevant, material, competent and noncumulative." * * * * * *”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In the instant case there were no facts given in the motion for severance, no allegations regarding what testimony would be elicited from the codefendant, no assurance by affidavit or otherwise that once the severance was granted the codefendant would be willing to testify and nothing in the record to indicate that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a severance.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “whether the evidence sought to be elicited by the defendant from his codefendant would have been relevant to his defense, of substantial use to him and not unduly cumulative.”
    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.