Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 591 So. 2d 977 - Fassi v. State

591 So. 2d 977 - Fassi v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
2
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Serfass v. United States · 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · Crist v. Bretz · United Transportation Union v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority · Air Line Pilots Ass'n, International v. Shugrue

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

  1. “"We agree with Judge Schwartz's reasoning that under certain circumstances, a defendant's right to obtain a chosen jury may be infringed upon by the state's bad faith conduct whether the selected jury is discharged before or after it has been sworn. We recognize that the decision to nolle pros is within the state's discretion and that a nolle pros may be filed any time before the jury has been sworn or evidence has been presented. [c.o.] This is not to say, however, that the state has unbridled discretion. We are additionally cognizant of the fact that jeopardy ordinarily does not attach until a jury is empaneled and sworn. We recognize that the decision to nolle pros is within the state's discretion and that a nolle pros may be filed any time before the jury has been sworn or evidence has been presented. [c.o.] It is our conclusion that the circumstances in the present case are insufficient to create an exception to the bright line rule. "Although appellee's conduct in this case was questionable, we are unable to conclude from the record before us that it was motivated by bad faith.”
    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.