562 So. 2d 328 - Fridovich v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2016
5 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 Price v. Georgia · 500 So. 2d 540 - Florida Bar v. Stahl · 496 So. 2d 138 - McGarry v. State · 390 So. 2d 322 - Rubin v. State · 101 So. 2d 373 - Mead 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.
“There is no rule or other authority which'requires the state to file a new information upon remand for a new trial in these circumstances. Pursuant to the mandate of the district court, the state need file only a motion to set the case for trial with the trial court. The trial judge is then obligated to instruct the jury on the crime with which the defendant is charged and to set forth the charge in accordance with Florida Standard Jury Instruction (Criminal) 1.01. The state is not required to file a new charging document setting forth the lesser included offense on which the defendant will be tried. There is no question that a new- charging document would be helpful to the state, the defendant, the judge, and the jury and that it would lessen the possibility of the jury’s knowing that the defendant was originally charged with first-degree murder. However, a new charging document was neither necessary nor jurisdictional in this case. The trial court had jurisdic tion to try the offense of manslaughter without the refiled information and the state was not in any way changing the offense to be tried or abandoning the charge of manslaughter for this incident.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Andrews
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.