Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 700 So. 2d 664 - Pender v. State

700 So. 2d 664 - Pender v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently May 2018

16 state decisions

100199720002010decided

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 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio · 246 So. 2d 771 - Richardson v. State · Justus v. Florida · State v. Schopp · 500 So. 2d 125 - Smith 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[O]nly 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.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[T]he [district] court did not indicate that in conducting a harmless error analysis it considered the impact of the State's discovery violation or the trial court's failure to conduct a Richardson hearing on the defendants' trial preparation. Instead, it appears that the district court, in direct contravention of Schopp , considered the impact of these errors on the fact finder. The opinion... seems to indicate that the district court based its holding on a finding that the defendants did not experience any substantive prejudice.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[W]here a trial court rules that no discovery violation occurred, the reviewing court must first determine whether the trial court abused its discretion.”
    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.