179 Ind. App. 28 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Johnson, without time to procure an expert and conduct a similar examination of the gun, could not offer any expert evidence to rebut Roberts’ testimony. An evening to depose the State’s surprise expert witness was grossly inadequate for Johnson’s defense counsel to review and analyze the expert’s testimony and to obtain on short notice an expert witness of his own for rebuttal. This lack of opportunity to prepare for a surprise expert witness created a prejudice that could not be overcome by Johnson.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Liddell v. State

2. “"We do not agree with the State's contention that the one day delay in effect satisfied Johnson's request for a continuance. A continuance would have terminated the trial proceedings and at least provided counsel for Johnson with one workday to prepare to depose the expert Roberts on the technical subject matter of firearms. As it was, Johnson's counsel was occupied with trial during the day, deposed Roberts that evening, and was expected to cross-examine Roberts the following day."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cornett v. State

3. “the opportunity to depose a surprise expert witness in mid-trial was comparable in effect to a pre-trial denial of a motion to depose an opposing party's expert witness.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Simmons v. State