Mitchell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently April 2018
13 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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Von Moltke v. Gillies · Hardy v. United States · 66 Cal. 2d 606 - In Re Smiley
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'serious and weighty responsibility ... to determine whether there was an intelligent and competent waiver.... To discharge the duty imposed, a judge must investigate as long and as thoroughly as the circumstances of the case before him demand.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““There is no doubt that we are dealing here with one of the most fundamental of our constitutional guarantees. A defendant charged with a crime is guaranteed the right to be represented by counsel by Article 1, Section 13 of the Indiana Constitution and the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. State v. Minton, (1955) 234 Ind. 578 , 130 N.E.2d 226 ; Wilson v. State, (1943) 222 Ind. 63 , 51 N.E.2d 848 . A failure to permit a defendant to have counsel amounts to a denial of due process, and there can be no valid criminal trial unless a defendant is represented by counsel if he desires counsel. Fitzgerald v. State, (1970) 254 Ind. 39 , 257 N.E.2d 305 ; State v. Minton, supra; DeFrisco v. State, (1972) 153 Ind.App. 609 , 288 N.E.2d 576 . “The guarantee of the right to be represented by counsel includes the right for an indigent defendant in a criminal prosecution to have counsel provided for him at state expense. Pallett v. State, (1978) [269] Ind. [396], 381 N.E.2d 452 ; Swinehart v. State, (1978) [268] Ind. [460], 376 N.E.2d 486 . It is a judicial function to determine whether counsel shall be appointed at public expense, Fulks v. State, (1970) 255 Ind. 81 , 262 N.E.2d 651 , and this determination is within the sound discretion of the trial judge. Hendryx v. State, (1892) 130 Ind. 265 , 29 N.E. 1131 . While it is not possible to set specific monetary guidelines which would determine a defendant’s indigency, there are several factors which mus”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Blinn 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.