494 So. 2d 910 - Langham v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 state decisions

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

1. “'. . . trial convenience and economy of judicial and prosecutorial resources — considerations of particular weight when the Government and the courts have been placed under strict mandate to expedite criminal trials.' Moreover, 'the defendant may prefer the disadvantages of joinder to the harassment, delay, trauma, and expense of multiple prosecutions.' Disposal of all of the charges in a single prosecution may facilitate concurrent sentencing, and will avoid the possibility of the convicted defendant later being disadvantaged by having a detainer filed against him for offenses not tried.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 568 So. 2d 354 - Williams v. State · 548 So. 2d 547 - Hinton v. State

2. “"(b) Consolidation. If a defendant has been charged in separate indictments, informations, or complaints, the court, on its own initiative or on motion of either party, may, not later than seven days prior to trial, order that the charges be tried together if the offenses could have been joined in a single indictment, information, or complaint. . . ."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 548 So. 2d 547 - Hinton v. State · 630 So. 2d 92 - Yelder v. State

3. “"(a) Joinder. Two or more offenses may be jointed in an indictment, information, or complaint, if they:”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 640 So. 2d 22 - Kennedy v. State · 548 So. 2d 547 - Hinton v. State