Warrick v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably McMillian v. State (1992), Lodowski v. State (1986)
60 state decisions
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 Taliaferro v. Maryland · Dempsey v. State · Coleman v. State · Taliaferro v. State · White 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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen a discovery violation comes to light in the course of trial, whether any sanction is to be imposed and, if so, what it is to be, is in the first instance committed to the discretion of the trial judge. The exercise of that discretion includes evaluating whether a discovery violation has caused prejudice. When asked to grant a mistrial as a sanction for a discovery violation by the State which was revealed during trial a circuit judge would look at the record as a whole to determine whether the matter omitted from a formal discovery production by the State had nevertheless been timely communicated to or known to the defense in some other way.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bailey v. State · Brown v. State“[t]he State's Attorney's obligations under this section extend to material and information in the possession or control of ... any others who have participated in the investigation ... of the case and who... with reference to the particular case have reported to his office.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bailey v. State · Baynor v. State““(a) Without the necessity of a request, the state’s attorney shall furnish to the defendant: “(2) Any relevant material or information regarding ... pretrial identification of the defendant by a witness for the State. * Sfc * * * * “(i) ... If at any time during the proceedings the court finds that a party has failed to comply with this Rule or an order issued pursuant to this Rule, the court may order that party to permit the discovery of the matters not previously disclosed, strike the testimony to which the undisclosed matter relates, grant a reasonable continuance, prohibit the party from introducing in evidence the matter not disclosed, grant a mistrial, or enter any other order appropriate under the circumstances.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Evans v. State
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.