Buchanan v. Kentucky’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

208 federal appellate · 49 district · 485 state decisions

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

1. “if a defendant requests such an evaluation or presents psychiatric evidence, then, at the very least, the prosecution may rebut this presentation with evidence from the reports of the examination that the defendant requested.”

   75 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Penry v. Johnson · Gall v. Parker

2. “"Petitioner contends that, if the use of a pretrial psychological evaluation is allowed, as in this case, defense counsel will be reluctant to request competency evaluations, even if they believe that their clients are in need of one, or they may `sandbag' the trial by raising the competency issue in a post-trial motion.... Moreover, petitioner argues that the rule requiring competency examinations when the trial judge has doubts about the defendant's mental condition, ..., will be undermined by a decision in favor of the Commonwealth. "While we cannot foresee the tactics of defense counsel, we find somewhat curious petitioner's prediction and proposed solution. Where a competency examination is required ... and where the defendant does not place his mental state at issue, the Fifth and Sixth Amendments would mandate that he be allowed to consult with counsel and be informed of his right to remain silent. We observed in Smith that if, after receiving such advice and warnings, a defendant expresses his desire to refuse to answer any questions, the examination can still proceed `under the condition that the results would be applied solely for that purpose.' [ Estelle v. Smith, ] 451 U.S., at 468 [ 101 S.Ct. at 1875 ]. Thus, where a defendant does not make an issue of his mental condition, we fail to see how the decision today will undermine Pate [v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375, 86 S.Ct. 836 , 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966)]. Where, however, a defendant places his mental status at issue and t”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 640 So. 2d 982 - McWilliams v. State

3. “whether the admission of findings from a psychiatric examination of petitioner proffered solely to rebut other psychological evidence presented by petitioner violated his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights where his counsel had requested the examination and where petitioner attempted to establish at trial a mental-status defense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Ryan