Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 310 Ga. App. 623 - Holland v. State

310 Ga. App. 623 - Holland v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
March 2016
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Bridges v. State · Ward v. State · Linson v. State · Loren v. State · Young 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Since the grant or denial of a motion to sever is left in the discretion of the trial court, its ruling will only be reversed for an abuse of discretion. . . . Factors the trial court should consider in exercising its discretion include: (1) whether the number of defendants creates confusion of the evidence and law applicable to each defendant; (2) whether a danger exists that evidence admissible against one defendant will be considered against the other, despite cautionary instructions; and (3) whether the defenses are antagonistic.”
    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.