Townsend v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 8 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]ere we to read Haak as prohibiting any substantive changes after the specified times in subsection (b), the provisions for a continuance would be largely unnecessary. See State v. Gullion, 546 N.E.2d 121, 123 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989) ("To hold that [I.C. § 35-34-1-5] does not permit charges to be amended for other than form anytime after 30 days prior to the omnibus date would make subsection (d) superfluous.”).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Troy Shaw v. State of Indiana

2. “(b) The indictment or information may be amended in matters of substance or form, and the names of material witnesses may be added, by the prosecuting attorney, upon giving written notice to the defendant, at any time up to: (1) thirty (80) days if the defendant is charged with a felony; or (2) fifteen (15) days if the defendant is charged only with one (1) or more misdemeanors; before the omnibus date. ...”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fajardo v. State

3. “expression, by words or action, of an intention to unlawfully injure the person threatened or another person, or damage property.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Earlywine v. State