State v. MacHon’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably 823 So. 2d 877 - State v. Bridgewater (2002), 502 So. 2d 543 - State v. Perry (1986)
1 federal appellate · 37 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 State v. Sepulvado · 277 So. 2d 126 - State v. Prieur · State v. Washington · 400 So. 2d 1363 - State v. Tilley · 352 So. 2d 607 - State v. Carter
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If it appears that a defendant or the state is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses in an indictment or bill of information or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order separate trials, grant a severance of offenses, or provide whatever other relief justice requires.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Harris · State v. Smith“Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors, 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; provided that the offenses joined must be triable by the same mode of trial.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““Mental incapacity to proceed exists when, as a result of mental disease or defect, a defendant presently lacks the capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Huckaby
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.