Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 358 F.2d 259 - Elsperman v. Wainwright

Elsperman v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis

358 F.2d 259 · 1966

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
October 2005
most recently cited

5 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 2005

5 federal appellate ·

3019661970198019902000decided

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 Lastinger 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. “it is not enough for the trial Court to ask an indigent defendant merely whether he desires counsel: the Court must affirmatively inform the defendant that it has a duty to appoint counsel for him if he so desires.” Id. at 260 . This language is dicta. Elsperman's holding is that the habeas petitioner was entitled to a hearing on his”
    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.