Watters v. Hubbard’s Empirical Analysis
725 F.2d 381 · 1984
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently May 2007
10 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 4244 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Wainwright v. Sykes · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Engle v. Isaac · Sumner v. Mata · Estelle v. Smith
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“claim rejected in Engle. The same conclusion is reached by this Court under Watters. In Watters, the petitioner argued that the state prosecutor's cross-examination questioning of his court-appointed psychiatrists violated his privilege against self-incrimination. The state argued that Watters failed to make a specific objection as required under Ohio law and that the claim was thus barred under Engle. 74 In denying Watters' claim, the Sixth Circuit concluded that since the case law”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Moore v. Zant“Evidence of a defendant’s inculpatory statements during a psychiatric examination cannot be admitted to prove guilt. To hold otherwise would make the privilege against self-incrimination illusory. Moreover, such evidence should not be permitted to affect the jury’s determination on that issue to any greater extent than is inherent in an insanity plea which unavoidably may contain an admission that defendant did the act but under circumstances for which he is not responsible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Tallabas“by the time of his trial recognized the Fifth Amendment implications inherent in evidence of inculpatory admissions to examining psychiatrists [cits],”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Moore v. Zant
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.