McGarty v. O'Brien’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 1 district · 23 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * Obviously enough, an indigent defendant with assigned counsel may be at a disadvantage as compared with a wealthy defendant having unlimited means for the hiring of investigators, of various sorts of expert witnesses, of a battery of lawyers. It is indeed not only the wholly indigent defendant who is subject to this disadvantage, but also accused persons of small means who still have money enough to employ counsel of their own choice. Such disadvantage, of course, is not imposed by the state, but results from the financial situation in which the accused finds himself. How far the state, having the obligation to afford to the accused a fair trial, a fair opportunity to make his defense, is required under the due process clause to minimize this disadvantage is a matter which, in other contexts, may deserve serious examination. “The issue presented for decision in the present case is a much narrower one. This is not a case where the state has refused to provide an impartial psychiatric examination of the accused with a view to determining his sanity and criminal responsibility. Quite the contrary, in compliance with a mandatory provision of law, the state has, at public expense, provided such examination by two impartial experts; and their joint report has been made available to the defense. The doctors designated by the Department of Mental Health to make the examination are not partisans of the prosecution, though their fee is paid by the state, any more than is assign”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ellison v. State · Cain v. Abramson

2. ““[Ejxamination and report by two competent and impartial experts supplied at state expense is enough, we think, to satisfy the state’s consti tutional obligation under the due process clause.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bush v. McCollum · 2 Va. App. 532 - Snurkowski v. Commonwealth

3. “`allowed, at the expense of the Commonwealth, to employ medical experts to impartially examine him, and to be used, if necessary, as witnesses in his behalf.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Aaron Proctor v. David W. Harris