DeVillez v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently June 2004 · most notably Mato v. State (1985), Silvers v. State (1986)
30 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 Henderson v. Morgan · Henry v. State of Mississippi · Blackburn v. State · Wilson v. State · Magley 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“At the plea stage second degree murder is a necessarily included offense within a charge of first degree murder.... Therefore, her knowledge of the true nature of the greater offense necessarily supplies sufficient knowledge of the true nature of the lesser and included offense of second degree murder.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Sanders · Gibson v. State“real notice of the true nature of the charge against him, the first and most universally recognized requirement of due process.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Patton v. State · State v. Sanders““Counsel is presumed to have prepared and executed his client’s defense effectively. State v. Irvin (1973), 259 Ind. 610 , 291 N.E.2d 70 ; Bobbins v. State (1971), 257 Ind. 273 , 274 N.E.2d 255 . This presumption is rationally grounded in the educational and other requirements for admission to the practice of law, but is rebuttable by strong and convincing proof. Robbins v. State, supra. In resolving the issue, a court should consider the totality of the circumstances surrounding counsel’s pre-trial preparation and the actual conduct of the trial. Lowe v. State (1973), 260 Ind. 610 , 298 N.E.2d 421 ; Blackburn v. State (1973), 260 Ind. 5 , 291 N.E.2d 686 ; Sargeant v. State (1973), 157 Ind.App. 173 , 299 N.E.2d 219 . Perfunctory representation is not enough. Wilson v. State (1943), 222 Ind. 63 , 51 N.E.2d 848 ; Castro v. State (1925), 196 Ind. 385 , 147 N.E. 321 . Counsel must have reasonable time for pre-trial preparation. Hartman v. State (1973), 155 Ind.App. 199 , 292 N.E.2d 293 . Deliberate choices made by counsel for some contemplated tactical or strategic reason which turn out to be detrimental to the client’s cause do not establish ineffective representation. Henry v. Mississippi (1965), 379 U.S. 443 , 85 S.Ct. 564 , 13 L.Ed.2d 408 ; Lowe v. State, supra.” Magley v. State, (1975) 263 Ind. 618 , 335 N.E.2d 811, 814 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Field 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.