259 Pa. Super. 552 - Commonwealth v. Floyd’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
April 1994
most recently cited
17 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Commonwealth v. Gee · Commonwealth v. Turner · Commonwealth v. Smith · State v. Taylor
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The selection of a remedy for the violation of a sequestration order is within the sound discretion of the trial court. See Commonwealth v. Martin, 440 Pa. 150, 153 , 269 A.2d 722, 723 (1970); Commonwealth v. Turner, 389 Pa. 239, 264 , 133 A.2d 187, 199 (1957). In exercising its discretion, the trial court should consider the seriousness of the violation, its impact on the testimony of the witness, and its probable impact on the outcome of the trial. We will disturb the trial court's exercise of its discretion only if there is no reasonable ground for the action taken. Commonwealth v. Smith, 464 Pa. 314, 320-1 , 346 A.2d 757, 760 (1975). Additionally, we have stated the trial court should consider whether the witness intentionally disobeyed the order so that he might determine what the others will testify to, and whether the party calling the witness procured his disobedience. Commonwealth v. Smith, 227 Pa.Super. 355, 372 , 324 A.2d 483, 492 (1974). See also, Commonwealth v. Gibson, 245 Pa.Super. 103 , 369 A.2d 314 (1976).”
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.