Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 695 N.E.2d 934 - Roach v. State

Roach v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
2
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 60 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Wooley v. State (1999), Stephenson v. State (2001)

1 federal appellate · 60 state decisions

290199820002010decided

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 Chambers v. Mississippi · Washington v. Texas · Wright v. State · United States v. Peak · Kingery 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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Every defendant has the fundamental right to present witnesses in their own defense. Chambers v. Mississippi 410 U.S. 284, 302 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973); Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14, 19 , 87 S.Ct. 1920 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1019 (1967); Kellems v. State, 651 N.E.2d 326, 328 (Ind.Ct.App.1995). This right “is in plain terms the right to present a defense, the right to present the defendant’s version of the facts as well as the prosecution’s to the jury so it may decide where the truth lies.” Washington, 388 U.S. at 19 , 87 S.Ct. 1920 . At the same time, while, the right to present witnesses is of the utmost importance, it is not absolute. See Chambers, 410 U.S. at 302 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 ; Kellems, 651 N.E.2d at 328 . “In the exercise of this right, the accused, as is required of the State, must comply mth established rules of procedure and evidence designed to assure both fairness and reliability in the ascertainment of guilt and innocence.” Chambers, 410 U.S. at 302 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'In the exercise of this right, the accused, as is required of the State, must comply with established rules of procedure and evidence designed to assure both fairness and reliability in the ascertainment of guilt and innocence.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[I]n addition to any sentence imposed under this article for a felony or misdemeanor, the court may, as a condition of probation or without placing the person on probation, order the person to make restitution to the victim of the crime, the victim's estate, or the family of a victim who is deceased. The court shall base its restitution order upon a consideration of: (1) property damages of the victim incurred as a result of the crime, based on the actual cost of repair ...; (2) medical and hospital costs incurred by the victim (before the date of sentencing) as a result of the crime; (3)earnings lost by the victim (before the date of sentencing) as a result of the crime including earnings lost while the victim was hospitalized or participating in the investigation or trial of the crime; ...”
    2 later decisions 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.