Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 274 Ind. 457 - Duncan v. State

Duncan v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
5
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably Harris v. State (1981), Alexander v. State (1983)

43 state decisions

28019801990200020102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2421 (White-Slave Traffic Act of 1910 (Mann Act))

Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Bell v. United States · Eisenstadt v. Baker · Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. Chemtronics, Inc. · Blackburn 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The services of an attorney appointed by the court may not be forced upon a pauper defendant but if the defendant refuses to be represented by the appointed counsel, he must find some method to employ his own counsel or proceed in propria persona. (Cit. omitted.) The defendant may not arbitrarily compel a trial court to discharge competent appointed counsel.” Id. at 615-616 , 291 N.E.2d at 74 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"between the same principals at the same time and place which violates a single statutory provision does not justify conviction of and sentence for separate crimes even though more than one controlled substance is involved."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"if Congress does not fix the punishment for a federal offense clearly and without ambiguity, doubt will be resolved against turning a single transaction into multiple offenses." Duncan, supra, 412 N.E.2d at 775 , quoting Bell v. State (1955) 349 U.S. 81, 84 , 75 S.Ct. 620, 622 [ 75 S.Ct. 620 , 99 L.Ed. 905 ].”
    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.