Melanson v. O'Brien’s Empirical Analysis
191 F.2d 963 · 1951
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1976 · most notably Brown v. Allen (1953), United States v. Lebron (1955)
30 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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 Glasser v. United States · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Berger v. United States · In re Oliver · Townsend v. Burke
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This right to employ and be represented by counsel involves as a corollary the obligation of the state not to deprive the accused of the effective exercise of such right, by pressing the criminal proceedings either without affording him a reasonable opportunity to secure such counsel or without affording counsel a reasonable time in which to consult with his client, investigate the case, secure witnesses, and otherwise map out the defense.” Melanson v. O’Brien, 191 F.2d 963, 968 (1 Cir. 1951) citing Avery v. State of Alabama, 308 U.S. 444 , 188 So. 397 , 60 S.Ct. 321 , 84 L.Ed. 377 (1940); House v. Mayo, 324 U.S. 42 , 65 S.Ct. 517 , 89 L.Ed. 739 (1945); White v. Ragen, 324 U.S. 760 , 65 S.Ct. 978 , 89 L.Ed. 1348 (1945); Hawk v. Olson, 326 U.S. 271 , 66 S.Ct. 116 , 90 L.Ed. 61 (1945).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It does not appear from an examination of the transcript of the trial that the court ever asked the defendant whether he had counsel or desired to be represented by counsel. If the prosecutor had made known to the court the accused's request for a postponement in order to secure counsel, it could hardly be doubted that the court would under the circumstances have granted a continuance at least for a few days. But due to the action of the prosecutor the accused's request for postponement never even came to the attention of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Melanson v. O'Brien“To determine the precise degree of prejudice sustained by Glasser as a result of the court's appointment of Stewart as counsel for Kretsky is at once difficult and unnecessary. The right to have the assistance of counsel is too fundamental and absolute to allow courts to indulge in nice calculations as to the amount of prejudice arising from its denial.”
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.