Lockhart v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently October 2011 · most notably State Ex Rel. LeBlanc v. Henderson (1972), Brimhall v. State (1972)
49 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 Boykin v. Alabama · Brady v. United States · McMann v. Richardson · Haynes v. Washington · Leyra v. Denno
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * the fears of the appellant brought about by the surrounding circumstances cannot be considered the type of coercion which would require the trial court to permit withdrawal of the guilty plea. Under the circumstances the appellant was simply placed in a situation where he was required to make a judgment as to the best course of action for him to take. We cannot say that his decision to plead guilty constituted an involuntary situation simply because of the existence of overwhelming evidence and the threat of a life sentence.’ ” See also Brady v. United States (1970), 397 U.S. 742 , 90 S.Ct. 1463 , 25 L.Ed.2d 747 . However, Brooks attempts to distinguish his situation on the grounds that he was crying during one portion of the hearing on the guilty plea.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““The State to some degree encourages pleas of guilty at every important step in the criminal process. For some people, their breach of a State’s law is alone sufficient reason for surrendering themselves and accepting punishment. For others, apprehension and charge, both threatening acts by the Government, jar them into admitting their guilt. In still other cases, the post-indictment accumulation of evidence may convince the defendant and his counsel that a trial is not worth the agony and expense to the defendant and his family. All these pleas of guilty are valid in spite of the State’s responsibility for some of the factors motivating the pleas; the pleas are no more improperly compelled than is the decision by a defendant at the close of the State’s evidence at trial that he must take the stand or face certain conviction.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Boles v. State · Koppi v. State““Insofar as the voluntariness of his plea is concerned, there is little to differentiate Brady from ... (3) the defendant who is permitted by prosecutor and judge to plead guilty to a lesser offense included in the offense charged; ... In each of these situations, as in Brady’s case, the defendant might never plead guilty absent the possibility or certainty that the plea will result in a lesser penalty than the sentence that could be imposed after a trial and a verdict of guilty. We decline to hold, however, that a guilty plea is compelled and invalid under the Fifth Amendment whenever motivated by the defendant’s desire to accept the certainty or probability of a lesser penalty rather than face a wider range of possibilities extending from acquittal to conviction and a higher penalty authorized by law for the crime charged.” ( 274 N.E.2d at 526 , quoting 90 S.Ct. at 1470 .)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Koppi v. State
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.