State v. Leggett’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
102 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 428 So. 2d 444 - State v. Seiss (1983), 936 So. 2d 108 - State v. Leger (2006)
102 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 Estelle v. Williams · Baker v. United States · State v. Lacoste · 345 So. 2d 1179 - State v. Hegwood · State v. Tennant
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]here is no constitutional right to make a new choice of counsel on the very date the trial is to begin, with the attendant necessity of a continuance and its disrupting implications.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nickles · State v. Champ“* * * When the defense objects before the jury is impaneled and the objection is not simply a dilatory tactic, then the state is not prejudiced by allowing defendant the extra time to change to civilian clothing. The trial court erred in not allowing the defendant this right. Defendant should not be required to wear a prison jumpsuit at the trial, however attractive, if defendant objects and desires to wear his own civilian clothing.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The trial court's ruling was correct. We find the following pertinent in reaching our conclusion: (1) The alleged retained attorney neither appeared in court to verify his retention, nor communicated with the trial judge in any other way; (2) the record reflects only defendant's statement that a third party had contacted and retained the attorney and that defendant had only had a telephone conversation with the attorney; (3) appointed counsel had filed a prior motion on the same ground regarding another alleged retained counsel; (4) the motion was made on the morning of trial; and (5) the alleged retained counsel neither made an appearance nor contacted the court either during the trial or on the Motion for New Trial. We are convinced, as was the trial judge, that defendant's request was a dilatory tactic."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.