Walls v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 2016
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 669 So. 2d 44 - Williams v. State · Moore v. State · 218 So. 2d 436 - Peeples 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a defendant moves for a new trial based on recanted testimony, the defendant has the burden of proving two elements to the satisfaction of the trial judge at the evidentiary hearing: (1) he must have sufficiently proven the perjury existed by showing that the recantation was material, and (2) he must have proven the result of a new trial would be different than the one reached.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A court will usually deny a new trial based on recanting testimony where it is not fully satisfied regarding the truthfulness of the testimony. The determina tion should be left to the sound discretion of the trial court and should not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. Recanting testimony has been shown to be extremely unreliable and should be approached with suspicion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Franklin 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.