State v. Karston’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 state decisions

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

1. ““No matter how ruthlessly he may have disregarded the rights of others, no matter how callously he may have deprived innocent citizens of their lives or property without notice or the slightest opportunity for defense, the wrongdoer, when brought to book in a court of justice, is always quick to insist upon his own rights, to the last technicality; and it is the settled and just policy of our law to give them to him. The more serious the offense of which he is accused, the more carefully will the safeguards of the law be thrown around him. It will not do in any case to say that the accused is plainly guilty of an atrocious murder and so the means used to convict is justified by the end to be attained. C i “It should he noted that the state courts are hound hy the federal courts’ interpretation of the law on this point, at least where capital offenses are concerned. Bute v. People of State of Illinois, 333 U.S. 640, 674 , 68 S.Ct. 763, 780 , 92 L.Ed. 986 ; Uvegas v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 335 U.S. 437, 440, 441 , 69 S.Ct. 184, 185, 186 , 93 L.Ed. 127 ; Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 70, 71 , 62 S.Ct. 457, 464, 465 , 86 L.Ed. 680 ; Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 , 53 S.Ct. 55 , 77 L.Ed. 158 , 84 A.L.R. 527 . It is the definite holding of the Supreme Court of the United States that a failure of a state court to make an effective appointment of counsel may in all eases where the defendant is charged with a serious offense, and certainly does in capital cases, so of”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 184 Cal. App. 2d 622 - People v. Kerfoot

2. “It will generally be found when two or more are accused of a serious crime, that their interests are to some extent divergent. Often the question will arise as which was the planner of the crime, which took the leading part, or in many other ways each may desire to attempt to throw the onus upon the other.... [I]t is settled that where there may be adverse interests, each defendant is entitled to separate representation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Powell

3. ““ * * * 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
   e.g. State v. Tapia