State v. Albert’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 2016
15 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
Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority · United States v. Jackson · Bearden v. Georgia · United Housing Foundation, Inc. v. Forman
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“James and Fuller do not require a prior determination of ability to pay in a recoupment system which treats recoupment judgment debtors like other civil judgment debtors. . . .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Nonindigents who must pay for counsel may choose to forego counsel because they believe that the benefits of counsel's service are outweighed by its costs. The fact that our market system forces nonindi-gents to make such a choice has never been regarded as a deprivation of the right to counsel, even though the fees incurred in serious felony cases may exceed all the assets of all but the wealthiest defendants. An indigent's choice as to whether or not to accept appointed counsel, given the eventual cost of counsel under Criminal Rule 39, is not different in kind from the economic choice which must be made by a nonindigent accused of crime. There is no principled way to say that the burden placed on the indigent is unconstitutional while that placed on the nonindigent is constitutional.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Malutin v. State“Upon conviction of an offense, [or] revocation of probation, [or] denial of a motion to withdraw plea, [or] denial of a motion brought under Criminal Rule 35.1 [{.e., denial of a petition for post-conviction relief], the court shall prepare a notice of intent to enter judgment for the cost of appointed counsel in accordance with [the schedule of costs contained in] paragraph (d) of this rule{[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Malutin 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.