Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 321 F. Supp. 367 - Wall v. Purdy

321 F. Supp. 367 - Wall v. Purdy’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
November 1995
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Bloom v. Illinois · Cheff v. Schnackenberg · Frank v. United States

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

  1. “From a pragmatic point of view, courts cannot help but struggle to find some rational, fair line beyond which the absolute right to counsel becomes merely a privilege to be provided in the sound discretion of the trial judge. Although the administration of criminal justice is cloaked in abstract principles, these principles are seriously jeopardized if the system breaks down under the sheer weight of the demands which it imposes.”
    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.