State v. Barnett’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 2021
21 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 Mathews v. Eldridge · Gideon v. Wainwright · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Douglas v. People of State of California · Caldwell v. Mississippi
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[B]efore an indigent defendant is entitled to the assistance of a state-funded psychiatric expert, the defendant must make a threshold showing of particular ized need. To establish particularized need, the defendant must show that a psychiatric expert is necessary to protect his right to a fair trial. Unsupported assertions that a psychiatric expert is necessary to counter the State’s proof are not sufficient. The defendant must demonstrate by reference to the facts and circumstances of his particular case that appointment of a psychiatric expert is necessary to insure a fair trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Scott · State v. Vaughn“[t]he due process principle of fundamental fairness applies to all criminal prosecutions, and does not rest upon the severity of the sanction sought or imposed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[p]articularized need cannot be established and funding requests should be denied where the motion contains only: (A) undeveloped or conclusory assertions that such services would be beneficial; (B) assertions establishing only the mere hope or suspicion that favorable evidence may be obtained; (C) information indicating that the requested services relate to factual issues or matters within the province and understanding of the jury; or (D) information indicating that the requested services fall within the capability and expertise of appointed counsel.”
1 later decision 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.