Lee v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
322 F.2d 770 · 1963
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently January 1999 · most notably David Busby v. William C. Holman, Warden, Kilby Prison (1966), Virgil Norton, Virgil Wesley and James Chapman v. James P. McShane (1964)
50 federal appellate · 4 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 Wong Sun v. United States · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · McNabb 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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““That is not all. The Government’s brief concedes that secret, ex parte interrogations of defendants are not conducted when a prisoner has counsel. Presumably, legal ethics forbid a United States Attorney or a Government agent to bypass the lawyer of a defendant fortunate enough to have the means to engage counsel. This is a proper ethic for lawyers. But here the effect is to allow the prosecution to take advantage of an indigent prisoner without counsel, imperiling his constitutional rights by subjecting him to questioning intended to convict him, while recognizing an accused’s freedom from secret inquisition if he can afford counsel. This practice carries secret questioning to the point of invidious discrimination against indigent defendants.” ( 322 F.2d at 777 )”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““ * * * I emphatically condemn and' reject the majority’s view as simply personal decreeing and, as such, alien to this circuit and to the law generally and as completely unauthorized.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““In view of Justice Warren’s dissent in Crooker and Cicenia and the concurring opinions of Justices Black, Douglas, Brennan, and Stewart in Spano, it now appears that a majority of the Justices of the Supreme Court recognize the constitutional right to counsel during police interrogation in eases involving prosecution by the State.” 322 F.2d 770 at 775 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.