Mitchell v. Mason’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate ·

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

1. “so likely to prejudice the accused that the cost of litigating their effect in a particular case is unjustified.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 195 F. Supp. 2d 893 - Gonzalez v. Phillips · Wayne Hunt v. Betty Mitchell, Warden

2. “to have taken the time before commencing a first degree murder trial to inquire effectively into the circumstances, and to have ensured that the petitioner’s counsel was reasonably well prepared to defend his client. The trial court’s failure, in the face of the petitioner’s unanswered claims of lack of contact with his attorney and the lawyer’s eve-of-trial suspension from practice, to grant a short continuance is, in a word, incomprehensible. The compulsion to maintain a tidy docket should never, as it so clearly did here, place fundamental rights at risk. Would a week’s delay have really mattered? The message of this case is not that federal courts are quick to intervene into state proceedings; the message is, rather, that the state trial court in this case could and should have done a better job of upholding the Constitution. Had it taken but a few moments to consider the petitioner’s complaints meaningfully, or had it postponed the trial for a brief period to make certain that Evelyn was truly ready for trial, this case would not be here. The time the trial court may have saved has led to a great and otherwise unnecessary expenditure of time on the part of the Michigan courts of review, the district court, and this court.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Mitchell v. Mason

3. “of the prosecution. As we recently explained: 37 The Supreme Court has decided several cases that make clear that the period between appointment of counsel and the start of trial is indeed a”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Wayne Hunt v. Betty Mitchell, Warden