Adams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 2013
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Faretta v. California · Chambers v. Mississippi · Washington v. Texas · In re Oliver · Rock v. Arkansas
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““‘The right to testify on one’s own behalf at a criminal trial has sources in several provisions of the Constitution. It is one of the rights that “are essential to due process of law in a fair adversary process.” Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 819 n. 15, 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 2533 n. 15, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). The necessary ingredients of the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee that no one shall be deprived of liberty -without due process of law include a right to be heard and to offer testimony: “ ‘ “A person’s right to reasonable notice of a charge against him, and an opportunity to be heard in his defense — a right to his day in court — are basic in our system of jurisprudence; and these rights include, as a minimum, a right to examine the witnesses against him, to offer testimony, and to be represented by counsel.” (Emphasis added [in Rock].) In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, 273 , 68 S.Ct. 499, 507 , 92 L.Ed. 682 (1948). “ ‘See also Ferguson v. Georgia, [ 365 U.S. 570, 602 , 81 S.Ct. 756 , 5 L.Ed.2d 783 (1961) ] (Clark, J., concurring) (Fourteenth Amendment secures “right of a criminal defendant to choose between silence and testifying in his own behalf’). “ ‘The right to testify is also found in the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which grants a defendant the right to call “witnesses in his favor,” a right that is guaranteed in the criminal courts of the States by the Fourteenth Amendment. Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14, 17-19 , 87 S.Ct. 1920, 1922-1923 , 1”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. O.A.C. 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.