8 Haw. App. 317 - State v. Gaspar’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[m]ay not conclude that the defendant suffered prejudice from a joint trial ... unless it first concludes that a defendant was denied a fair trial. What might have happened had the motion for severance been granted is irrelevant speculation.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. AHQUIN · State v. Timas

2. “(1) when each of the defendants is charged with accountability for each offense included in the charge; (2) when each of the defendants is charged with conspiracy and some of the defendants are also charged with one or more offenses alleged to be in furtherance of the conspiracy; or (3) when, even if conspiracy is not charged and all of the defendants are not charged in each count, the several offenses charged: (i) were part of a common scheme or plan; or (ii) were so closely connected in respect to time, place and occasion that it would be difficult to separate proof of one charge from proof of the others.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Walton.

3. “If it appears that a defendant or the government is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in a charge or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order an election or separate trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Timas