656 So. 2d 595 - Sears v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2014
11 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 246 So. 2d 771 - Richardson v. State · State v. Schopp · 539 So. 2d 588 - In Interest of FR · 640 So. 2d 106 - Brown v. State · 627 So. 2d 24 - Rath 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[o]nce the asserted discovery violation was brought to the court's attention, the trial judge was required to conduct an inquiry, rule on whether a violation occurred, and determine whether the evidence was admissible.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he appellate court must consider whether there is a reasonable possibility that the discovery violation procedurally prejudiced the defense. As used in this context, the defense is procedurally prejudiced if there is a reasonable possibility that the defendant's trial preparation or strategy would have been materially different had the violation not occurred. Trial preparation or strategy should be considered materially different if it reasonably could have benefited the defendant. In making this determination[,] every conceivable course of action must be considered. If the reviewing court finds that there is a reasonable possibility that the discovery violation prejudiced the defense or if the record is insufficient to determine that the defense was not materially affected, the error must be considered harmful. In other words, only if the appellate court can say beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense was not procedurally prejudiced by the discovery violation can the error be considered harmless.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[O]nce put on notice of a violation, the trial court has an affirmative obligation to conduct a hearing without the defendant[] specifically requesting one.”
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.