Henderson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · 412 So. 2d 461 - Swartz v. Swartz · 372 So. 2d 420 - Wait v. Florida Power & Light Co. · Ivester v. State · Cabral 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“DOES SECTION 119.07(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (Supp.1996), LIMIT A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT'S PRETRIAL DISCOVERY OF NONEXEMPT PUBLIC RECORDS REGARDING HIS OR HER PENDING PROSECUTION, TO THE DISCOVERY PROVISIONS IN FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.220, SUCH THAT RECEIPT OF SUCH RECORDS TRIGGERS A RECIPROCAL DISCOVERY OBLIGATION FOR THAT DEFENDANT?”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a criminal defendant cannot utilize the Public Records Act to gain access to records related to that defendant's case to which the defendant could not otherwise gain access pursuant to rule 3.220, without triggering a reciprocal discovery obligation,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The provisions of this section are not intended to expand or limit the provisions of Rule 3.220, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding the right and extent of discovery by the state or by a defendant in a criminal prosecution. ...”
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.