Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 239 Ark. 1151 - Winters v. Beck

Winters v. Beck’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
8
states following
March 2005
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently March 2005 · most notably Rodriguez v. ROSENBLATT (1971), State v. Borst (1967)

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions

21019651970198019902000decided

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 Gideon v. Wainwright · Wimberly v. State · Kirkwood 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““On the strength of Ark. Stat. Ann. Sec. 43-1203 (Repl. 1964), the courts of this state have always appointed attorneys to represent indigent defendants in felony cases. Thousands of misdemeanor cases are tried in the Municipal Courts of Pulaski County annually. In most of these cases the defendants are not represented by counsel. But petitioner contends that on the strength of Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U. S. 335 , it is now the duty of the courts to appoint attorneys for indigents in misdemeanor cases. We do not so construe Wainwright . There, the court was dealing with a felony case where the defendant had been sentenced to five years in the penitentiary. Here, the petitioner, Winters, had 30 days to take an appeal to the Circuit Court. He did not appeal, although the procedure for appealing from the Municipal Court is very simple. The services of an attorney are not required at all.””
    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.