Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 F.3d 82 - United States v. Schmidt

United States v. Schmidt’s Empirical Analysis

105 F.3d 82 · 1997

Citation profile

104
cited by 104 later decisions
5
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably United States v. Diaz (1999), United States v. Morrison (1998)

34 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

4201997200020102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1114 · 18 U.S.C. § 373 · 18 U.S.C. § 751

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Faretta v. California · Rochin v. People of California · Dusky v. United States · United States v. Russell

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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the tactical decision of whether to call specific witnesses--even ones that might offer exculpatory evidence--is ordinarily not viewed as a lapse in professional representation.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “From defendant's answers and from its own observations, the trial court must be persuaded that the waiver is a rational one, and that defendant has the mental capacity to comprehend the consequences of relinquishing a constitutional right. An accused must therefore have had the disadvantages of proceeding without counsel pointed out to [him] and must be shown to possess sufficient ability to understand the nature of the proceedings against [him].”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a]bsent a constitutional right to standby counsel, a defendant generally cannot prove standby counsel was ineffective”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.