746 So. 2d 1 - State v. Cyrex’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under Barker , delays in bringing the case to trial caused by the state’s applications for supervisory review of interlocutory rulings may be weighed in determining whether or not a defendant has suffered a violation of his right to a speedy trial. See United States v. Loud Hawk, 474 U.S. 302, 316 , 106 S.Ct. 648, 656 , 88 L.Ed.2d 640 (1986). It is clear in this case, however, that defendant has failed to show a reason for according these delays any effective weight to wards the denial of his speedy trial claim. There is no showing of bad faith or dilatory purpose on the part of the state as to the writ applications. The state’s position in each of the three referenced writ applications was correct, and our decisions granting reversals in the applications are prima facie evidence of the reasonableness of the state’s action. See United States v. Loud Hawk, 474 U.S. at 316 , 106 S.Ct. at 656 . It is unfair for the defense to complain that the right to a speedy trial was violated when substantial time was consumed having erroneous trial court rulings reviewed.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 106 So. 3d 754 - State v. Bell · 94 So. 3d 983 - State v. Wilkins

2. “[i]f the court orders the defendant be provided a copy of the videotaped statement, only the attorney and the defendant shall be permitted to view the tape and no copies shall be made by any person.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Am