Morgan v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
396 F.2d 110 · 1968
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 5 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently June 1997 · most notably International Electronics Corp. v. Flanzer (1975), United States v. DeBerry (1973)
35 federal appellate · 5 district · 6 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2421 (White-Slave Traffic Act of 1910 (Mann Act)) · 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United State v. Morgan · Southern Railway Co. v. North Carolina · Parker v. Ellis · United States v. Bentvena · Brennan v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[w]here two defendants are represented by the same attorney, one defendant elects to take the stand and the other chooses not to, the possible prejudice in the eyes of the jury to the defendant who does not take the stand is almost inescapable.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““When a potential conflict of interest arises, either where a court has assigned the same counsel to represent several defendants or where the same counsel has been retained by co-defendants in a criminal case, the proper course of action for the trial judge is to conduct a hearing to determine whether a conflict exists to the degree that a defendant may be prevented from receiving advice and assistance sufficient to afford him the quality of representation guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. The defendant should be fully advised by the trial court of the facts underlying the potential conflict and be given the opportunity to express his views.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“unclear from the record why the court appointed Stein's attorney to represent Morgan”
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.