Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 593 So. 2d 1161 - Marshall v. State

593 So. 2d 1161 - Marshall v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 2006
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Arizona v. Fulminante · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio

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. “In deciding to allow an evidentiary hearing before making a decision on the necessity of a new trial, we have taken into account various factors including the existence of a record, the content of the record, and the lapse of time since the trial. We have also considered the interests of the victim, the child's family, the defendant, and the judicial system. The defendant was tried by a jury that included men and women as well as members of at least two distinct ethnic groups. If the procedural error was in fact harmless, the defendant's arguments would not seem sufficient to require the child and the family to be subjected to another trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.