644 So. 2d 1284 - Gillespie v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
September 2007
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Faretta v. California · 581 So. 2d 1144 - McLeod v. State · 601 So. 2d 124 - Tomlin v. State · 542 So. 2d 931 - Ex Parte Heaton · 600 So. 2d 440 - Landreth 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[I]n order to establish the necessity for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, the appellant must prove: (1) *Page 581 that the evidence was discovered after the trial; (2) that the evidence could not have been discovered prior to trial by due diligence on the part of the movant; (3) that the evidence is material to the issue of the appellant's guilt; (4) that the evidence is not merely cumulative or impeaching; and (5) that the evidence would probably change the outcome if a new trial was granted."”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Floyd v. State · Bradford v. State
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.