Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 789 SO2D 779 - Russell v. State

Russell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 437 So. 2d 19 - Box v. State · West v. State · 555 So. 2d 679 - Dennis v. State · 594 So. 2d 29 - Collins v. State · 776 So. 2d 643 - Jones 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “1) Upon defense objection, the trial court should give the defendant a reasonable opportunity to become familiar with the undisclosed evidence by interviewing the witness, inspecting the physical evidence, etc. 2) If, after this opportunity for familiarization, the defendant believes he may be prejudiced by lack of opportunity to prepare to meet the evidence, he must request a continuance. Failure to do so constitutes waiver of the issue. 3) If the defendant does request a continuance, the State may choose to proceed with trial and forego using the undisclosed evidence. If the State is not willing to proceed without the evidence, the trial court must grant the requested continuance.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Where, as here, the defendant is surprised with new evidence and where, as here, that evidence was known to the prosecution, though only for a short time, and where, as here, that evidence is detrimental to a central theory of defense, the defendant is entitled, at the very least, to an interview with the witness. The consumption of “10, 15, or 30 minutes for the attorney to investigate the ease” is a small price to pay to insure that the rule of law is followed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “We have articulated no requirement in Box or Ramos that the trial court find a discovery violation before allowing the defendant to interview the witness and proceed through the steps outlined above....”
    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.