Smith v. O'Grady’s Empirical Analysis
312 U.S. 329 · 1941
Citation profile
324 federal appellate · 44 district · 393 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,023 later decisions (63 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2024 · most notably Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), Bousley v. United States (1998)
324 federal appellate · 44 district · 393 state decisions — followed in 36 states
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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Mooney v. Holohan · Chambers v. Florida · Walker v. Johnston
Cited together with Henderson v. Morgan · Johnson v. Zerbst · Boykin v. Alabama · McCarthy v. United States · Walker v. Johnston
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 1,023 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“real notice of the true nature of the charge against him.”
43 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“without counsel, bewildered by court processes strange and unfamiliar to him, and inveigled by false statements of state law enforcement officers into entering a plea of guilty.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Allegations that petitioner had been denied any real notice of true nature of charge against him, that because of deception by Nebraska representatives he had pleaded guilty to a charge punishable by 20 years to life imprisonment, that his request for benefit of counsel had been denied by the court, and that he had been rushed to the penitentiary where his ignorance, confinement, and poverty had precluded the possibility of securing counsel to challenge the procedure by regular processes of appeal, stated a cause of action entitling petitioner to habeas corpus, since, if true, allegations showed a denial of ‘due process of law.’ ””
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.