Fletcher v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 2014
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Bradberry v. State · Ring v. Arizona · Stephenson v. State · Clark v. State · Smith v. State
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To the extent that the State relies upon the language in Underwood that “once counsel was appointed, Defendant spoke to the court through counsel,” we acknowledge that this language may suggest that appointment is the relevant time period for determining whether a defendant may file a pro se motion for a speedy trial. However, Underwood was addressing a situation in which counsel filed motions to continue following the defendant’s pro se motion for a speedy trial. Further, the issue of a distinction between the time a court appoints an attorney and the time an attorney files an appearance was not at issue. Accordingly, we disagree with the holding in Jenkins to the extent that it implies that the appointment of counsel and not the appearance of counsel is the relevant time.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The Majority indicates that certain language in our Supreme Court’s decision in Underwood v. State, 722 N.E.2d 828 (Ind.2000), as cited and discussed in Jenkins , “may suggest” that appointment of counsel, not counsel’s entry of an appearance, is the relevant time for purposes of determining whether a defendant may file a pro se motion for speedy trial. Op. at 929. I interpret Jenkins to hold that the Underwood language means precisely that, and I agree with Jenkins in this respect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“The Court notes that special Public Defender has previously been appointed. The Court affirms dates previously set.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Fletcher 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.