Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 227 F.2d 511 - Utah v. Sullivan

Utah v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis

227 F.2d 511 · 1955

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
May 1968
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 6 district · 8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Counselman v. Hitchcock · Stein v. People of State of New York Wissner · Hawk v. Olson · Propper v. Clark

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

  1. ““The trial court rested in part the granting of its writ upon the failure to furnish petitioners counsel at the time of their arraignment upon the criminal charge. Petitioners did not have counsel at the time they were arraigned and entered their pleas of not guilty in the district court. But immediately thereafter, separate counsel were appointed for them, respectively. At no time after the appointment of counsel was any effort made to withdraw such pleas in order to attack the charge, or for any other purpose. And there is a complete failure of any showing that at any juncture of the criminal case were the petitioners denied any substantive or procedural right which might have been available to them except for such pleas. Petitioners did not suffer any proscription or disadvantage at any point in the criminal case arising out of their pleas of not guilty, entered without the aid of counsel. And, while it is the general rule frequently reiterated that an accused is entitled to the benefit of counsel at every step of the proceeding, where one enters a plea of not guilty and is immediately thereafter furnished counsel for the preparation for trial, for the trial itself, and for the post-trial proceedings, the sentence imposed is not void for violating due process under the Fourteenth Amendment or for impingement of fundamental rights. Council v. Clemmer, supra [ 177 F.2d 22 ].” 227 F.2d 511, 514 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The constitutional provision contains no express or implied command that an accused shall be furnished counsel at the preliminary hearing. Moreover, petitioners did not enter pleas of guilty at -the preliminary hearing, did not make confessions, did not testify, and did not say anything of an incriminating nature. And in such circumstances, the failure to furnish them counsel at such hearing did not abridge their fundamental rights Which rendered fatally infirm their conviction and sentence.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “But on the trial of a criminal case in a state court the introduction in evidence of a free and voluntary confession made while uncounseled does not create an infirmity under the Fourteenth Amendment which empowers a United States Court to issue its writ of habeas corpus restraining execution of the judgment of the state court. Stein v. People of State of New York, 346 U.S. 156 , 73 S.Ct. 1077, 97 L.Ed. 1522.”
    1 later decision 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.