Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 246 SW3D 698 - Linton v. State

Linton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
2
states following
June 2009
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Brazell v. State · Adams v. State · Salazar v. State · Lincoln v. State

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

  1. “1. What is the standard of review in determining whether the trial court took adequate steps to ensure that the appellant had a minimum understanding of the proceedings? 2. Is the opinion of a defense expert, alone, sufficient to establish that a deaf relay interpreter was required when the expert did not use a deaf relay interpreter to evaluate the defendant; neither the defendant, counsel, nor the counsel-table interpreter testified that the defendant could not assist counsel; and the record shows that the defendant had a rational understanding of the charge against her and the facts? 3. What minimum level of comprehension is required to assure a defendant’s constitutional rights during a trial? In other words, is a fourth grade linguistic comprehension sufficient if the defendant has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings, has spontaneously and appropriately responded to testimony, and there is no evidence that the defendant could not assist counsel in her defense?”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Transliteration is the means by which spoken English is converted word for word into visual English.... Transliteration conveys the words being spoken. It does not decode the spoken English — that is, it does not get to the meaning. Rather, it recodes the English, making the spoken word visible, either in signed form or orally.” Michele LaVigne & McCay Vernon, An Interpreter Isn’t Enough: Deafness, Language, and Due Process, 2003 Wise. L.Rev. 843, 871 (2003).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.