Dearing v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

53 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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is noticeable that the judge did not advise appellant that he was entitled to have competent counsel represent him at public expense even though he was without money or means to pay counsel himself. See Batchelor v. State (1920), 189 Ind. 69, 77, 78 , 125 N. E. 773 . “. . . Both this court and the United States Supreme Court have consistently held that, there can be no valid judgment against a defendant in a criminal case unless he has been offered, and, if so desired, provided with adequate counsel. Knox County Council v. State ex rel. McCormick (1940), 217 Ind. 493, 510 , 29 N. E. 2d 405 , 130 A. L. R. 1427; Johnson v. Zerbst (1938), 304 U. S. 458, 468 , 58 S. Ct. 1019 , 82 L. Ed. 1461, 1468 . The court erred in failing to advise appellant, on his arraignment, that he was entitled to have competent counsel represent him at public expense if he was without money, means or credit to pay for it himself.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Adams v. State

2. ““Among other things it shows that the judge read the forgery statute, Sec. 10-2102 Burns 1942 Replacement, to appellant; told him he had a right to have a jury trial and to be represented by counsel, and asked him if he had an attorney to represent him in the matter and appellant answered ‘No Sir’. The judge then asked him if he desired an attorney, and he replied T don’t think so.’ The judge then asked: ‘Do you have money or means with which to employ counsel’ and appellant answered ‘No Sir’. The judge then said: T believe you said to me that you didn’t think you desired an attorney to represent you ?’ To which appellant answered ‘Yes, your Honor.’ The affidavit was then read by the prosecuting attorney after which the judge said: ‘What is your plea?’ Appellant answered : T plead guilty.’ The judge then sentenced him.””

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

3. ““It seems to be quite superfluous to say again that this court disapproves of trial courts receiving a plea of guilty from a defendant charged with a serious crime, who is not represented by counsel, until after reasonable inquiry into the facts to discover whether the plea is entered freely and understandingly. . . . One of the reasons for the adoption of Rule 1-11, supra, by this court is to provide an unimpeachable record showing the extent of the inquiry into the facts, circumstances and conditions made by the trial court to ascertain at the time whether the offered plea of guilty is made freely and understandingly. Without such record the trial court is, by its own volition, shorn of the procedural facts that might protect its judgment from attack.””

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