Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Rhode Island opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2007 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Rhode Island courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ramosgreen2 sentences1997In a later case, State v. Ramos , 553 A.2d 1059 (R.I. 1989), our Supreme Court indicated that in addition to the four Coelho factors "the trial justice must consider what is right and equitable under all of the circumstances. . . ." Id. at 1067 (quoting State v. Sciaria 448 A.2d 1215 , 1218-19 (R.I. 1982))." When considering an alleged discovery violation by the State, Rhode Island courts follow a "sliding-scale analysis" based on the blameworthiness of the prosecution. 1997In a later case, State v. Ramos , 553 A.2d 1059 (R.I. 1989), our Supreme Court indicated that in addition to the four Coelho factors "the trial justice must consider what is right and equitable under all of the circumstances. . . ." Id. at 1067 (quoting State v. Sciaria 448 A.2d 1215 , 1218-19 (R.I. 1982))." When considering an alleged discovery violation by the State, Rhode Island courts follow a "sliding-scale analysis" based on the blameworthiness of the prosecution. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Bouchergreen2 sentences2007Such an outcome recognizes that the purpose of Rule 16 “is to ferret out procedural, rather than substantive, prejudice.” Coelho, 454 A.2d at 245 ; see also Boucher, 542 A.2d at 241 . 2007Such an outcome recognizes that the purpose of Rule 16 “is to ferret out procedural, rather than substantive, prejudice.” Coelho, 454 A.2d at 245 ; see also Boucher, 542 A.2d at 241 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Garciagreen2 sentences1998See State v. Garcia, 643 A.2d 180, 187 (R.I.1994); Wyche, 518 A.2d at 911 . 1998See State v. Garcia, 643 A.2d 180, 187 (R.I.1994); Wyche, 518 A.2d at 911 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Rhode Island. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Coelho
green
2 sentences1998The Court reenunciated the Coelho factors as follows: “The trial justice should consider ‘(1) the reason for nondisclosure, (2) the extent of prejudice to the opposing party, (3) the feasibility of rectifying that prejudice by a continuance, and (4) any other relevant factors.’ ” Brisson, 619 A.2d at 1102 (quoting Coelho, 454 A.2d at 245 ). 1998The Court reenunciated the Coelho factors as follows: "The trial justice should consider `(1) the reason for nondisclosure, (2) the extent of prejudice to the opposing party, (3) the feasibility of rectifying that prejudice by a continuance, and (4) any other relevant factors.'" Brisson, 619 A.2d at 1102 (quoting Coelho, 454 A.2d at 245 ). | 3 | 1994–2007 |
State v. Brisson
green
2 sentences1998The Court reenunciated the Coelho factors as follows: “The trial justice should consider ‘(1) the reason for nondisclosure, (2) the extent of prejudice to the opposing party, (3) the feasibility of rectifying that prejudice by a continuance, and (4) any other relevant factors.’ ” Brisson, 619 A.2d at 1102 (quoting Coelho, 454 A.2d at 245 ). 1998The Court reenunciated the Coelho factors as follows: "The trial justice should consider `(1) the reason for nondisclosure, (2) the extent of prejudice to the opposing party, (3) the feasibility of rectifying that prejudice by a continuance, and (4) any other relevant factors.'" Brisson, 619 A.2d at 1102 (quoting Coelho, 454 A.2d at 245 ). | 2 | 1997–1998 |
State v. Wyche
green
2 sentences1998A motion for new trial for discovery and/or Brady violations was granted in State v. Wyche, 518 A.2d at 910-11 , for failure to provide the results of a blood test showing the alcohol content of the complaining witness that would have been of assistance to the defense and in the light of deliberate nondisclosure by the prosecution. 1998See State v. Garcia, 643 A.2d 180, 187 (R.I.1994); Wyche, 518 A.2d at 911 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
In Re Ouimette
green
2 sentences1997Brisson , 619 A.2d at 1102 (citing In Re Ouimette , 115 R.I. 169 , 342 A.2d 250 (1975)). 1997Brisson , 619 A.2d at 1102 (citing In Re Ouimette , 115 R.I. 169 , 342 A.2d 250 (1975)). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Sciarra
green
1 sentence1997In a later case, State v. Ramos , 553 A.2d 1059 (R.I. 1989), our Supreme Court indicated that in addition to the four Coelho factors "the trial justice must consider what is right and equitable under all of the circumstances. . . ." Id. at 1067 (quoting State v. Sciaria 448 A.2d 1215 , 1218-19 (R.I. 1982))." When considering an alleged discovery violation by the State, Rhode Island courts follow a "sliding-scale analysis" based on the blameworthiness of the prosecution. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.