175 Ind. App. 400 - Springer v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently September 1997
14 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Schmerber v. State of California · Gilbert v. California · Smith v. Hooey · Dickey v. Florida
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No facts are set forth supporting the assertion that ... [his] defense was impaired or that he was otherwise prejudiced. The record does not contain the names of allegedly missing witnesses nor the probable substance of their testimony. Indeed, a review of the transcript of testimony reveals but few lapses of memory, none of which related to an essential issue of the charge. We conclude that the delay in this case did not affect ‘the integrity of the fact finding process’.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Scott v. State
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.