642 So. 2d 391 - Ex Parte Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The State counters by asserting that [the appellant] had the opportunity to cross-examine [the witness] at trial regarding these items of evidence; it also argues that nondisclosure that merely hampers the defendant's preparation for trial is an insufficient quantum of prejudice to constitute reversible error.... Here, however, the failure to disclose the evidence totally prevented [appellant's] counsel from preparing portions of the defense.... Furthermore, this Court has previously rejected the argument now made by the State, that a defendant who has engaged in `thorough and sifting' cross-examination with respect to items not disclosed has suffered no prejudice."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 668 So. 2d 78 - Padgett v. State

2. “[T]he failure to disclose the evidence totally prevented [the appellant's] counsel from preparing portions of the defense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 839 So. 2d 665 - Martin v. State