Bernard v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

109

cited by 109 later decisions

states following

October 1989

most recently cited

109 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 109 later decisions — most recently October 1989 · most notably Blackburn v. State (1973), Dillard v. State (1971)

109 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 Cicenia v. Lagay · 47 Cal. 2d 566 - People v. Riser · Powell v. Superior Court · Siberry v. State · Kelley 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 109 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

““. . . That the trial judge has limited discretion and that when a list of witnesses is requested it should be granted unless the State makes a showing of a paramount interest over that of the defendant.” Bernard v. State (1967), 248 Ind. 688 , 230 N. E. 2d 536, 540 .”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. AMARO v. State · Partlow v. State
““Discovery may be provided for by statute, court rule or granted by the inherent power of the trial court. . . . While discovery in favor of the accused is not required by the constitutional guarantee of due process, Cicenia v. Lagay, 357 U.S. 504 (1958), it has been recognized that within the general nature of a trial court is the inherent power to order various types of discovery: discovery of the defendant’s confession . . .; prior statements of a prosecuting witness which are inconsistent with his later testimony, . . . [Citations omitted.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. Rickard v. State
““In all criminal cases where no special provision has been made in this act, the rules of pleading and practice in civil actions shall govern, so far as applicable.” (Our emphasis).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 156 Ind. App. 489 - Neeley 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.