Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 813 So. 2d 775 - Staten v. State

813 So. 2d 775 - Staten v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on California v. Trombetta · 459 So. 2d 793 - Fairchild v. State · 428 So. 2d 1361 - Pearson v. State · Lee v. State · 511 So. 2d 1368 - Tolbert 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.

  1. “To play a significant role, “the exculpatory nature and value of- the evidence must have been (1) apparent before the evidence was destroyed and (2) of such a nature that the defendant could not obtain comparable evidence by other reasonable means.” This constitutional materiality standard is not satisfied by the “mere possibility” that the evidence will help .the defense. That evidence is “important” is not sufficient to fulfill the constitutional standard of materiality.”
    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.