compulsory process clause (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

compulsory process clause in Indiana

6 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2011 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Pindergreen
fladistctapp · 1996 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011See also Pinder, 678 So.2d at 414-15 (unqualified privilege held by nongovernment actors more properly analyzed under a more general concept of due process).

2011See also Pinder, 678 So.2d at 414-15 (unqualified privilege held by nongov-ernment actors more properly analyzed under a more general concept of due process).

22

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Pennsylvania v. Ritchie green
scotus · 1987
2 sentences

2010The Court began by noting it "has had little occasion to discuss the contours of the Compulsory Process Clause." Id. at 55 , 107 S.Ct. 989 .

2010The Court began by noting it "has had little occasion to discuss the contours of the Compulsory Process Clause." Id. at 55 , 107 S.Ct. 989 .

22010–2010
Taylor v. Illinois green
scotus · 1988
2 sentences

2006Taylor argued that "the Sixth Amendment bars a court from ever ordering the preclusion of defense evidence as a sanction for violating a discovery rule." Id. at 406 , 108 S.Ct. 646 .

2006Taylor argued that "the Sixth Amendment bars a court from ever ordering the preclusion of defense evidence as a sanction for violating a discovery rule." Id. at 406 , 108 S.Ct. 646 .

22006–2006

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IN § Ind. Code § 35-37-6-1 (4) IN § Ind. Code § 35-37-6-1.5 (4) IN § Ind. Code § 35-37-6-11 (4) IN § Ind. Code § 35-37-6-5 (4) IN § Ind. Code § 35-37-6-9 (4) IN § Ind. Code § 25-23.6-6-1 (3) IN § Ind. Code § 25-33-1-17 (3) IN § Ind. Code § 35-37-6-3.5 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 21 (1982–2025) OR 17 (1954–2022) WA 15 (1981–2025) IL 14 (1981–2014) TX 12 (1983–2022) LA 11 (1981–2017) CT 11 (1989–2025) MA 11 (1978–2015) MD 10 (1983–2017) PA 8 (1979–1992) WI 8 (1989–2025) ID 8 (1985–2024) CO 7 (1986–2004) WV 6 (1987–2020) IN 6 (2006–2011) NH 6 (1978–1997) AZ 5 (1988–2024) WY 5 (1990–2017) NC 5 (1983–2025) NJ 5 (1978–1990) FL 4 (1984–2025) NM 3 (1988–1990) HI 3 (1980–2013) NV 3 (1989–2016) OK 3 (1992–2020) VA 3 (1996–2002) RI 2 (1989–1995) MO 2 (1994–1997) MS 2 (2007–2007) DE 2 (1984–1986) ND 2 (1982–1992) MI 2 (1982–1986) DC 2 (1986–1987) AK 2 (1977–2008) ME 2 (2000–2003) NE 2 (1993–2020)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check