Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 429 SO2D 691 - O'CALLAGHAN v. State

O'CALLAGHAN v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
1
states following
April 2017
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably 642 So. 2d 730 - Armstrong v. State (1994), 497 So. 2d 863 - Johnston v. State (1986)

43 state decisions

1601983199020002010decided

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 Harrington v. California · Schneble v. Florida · Clark v. State · 426 So. 2d 963 - Faison v. State · 401 So. 2d 1343 - State v. Rivers

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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he question of whether severance should be granted must necessarily be answered on a case by case basis... Specifically, the fact that a defendant might have a better chance of acquittal or a strategic advantage if tried separately does not establish the right to severance ... Nor is hostility among defendants, or an attempt by one defendant to escape punishment by throwing the blame on a codefendant, a sufficient reason, by itself, to require severance. .. . If the defendants engage in a swearing match as to who did what, the jury should resolve the conflicts and determine the truth of the matter. (Citations omitted.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The [severance] rule is designed to assure a fair determination of each defendant's guilt or innocence.... Specifically, the fact that the defendant might have a better chance of acquittal or a strategic advantage if tried separately does not establish the right to a severance. Nor is hostility among defendants, or an attempt by one defendant to escape punishment by throwing the blame on a codefendant, a sufficient reason, by itself, to require severance.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “because of our reciprocal discovery rules, [a defendant has] full knowledge of both the charges and the evidence that the state [will] submit at trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.