Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 404 U.S. 226 - Britt v. North Carolina

Britt v. North Carolina’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

1,413
cited by 1,413 later decisions
16
cited 16 times by the Supreme Court
43
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

298 federal appellate · 10 district · 869 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,413 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2023 · most notably San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973), Bounds v. Smith (1977)

298 federal appellate · 10 district · 869 state decisions — followed in 43 states

3580197119801990200020102020decided

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 Anders v. California · Brady v. State of Maryland · Gideon v. Wainwright · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Shapiro v. Thompson

Cited together with Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Ake v. Oklahoma · Roberts v. LaVallee · Mayer v. City of Chicago · Caldwell v. Mississippi

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 1,413 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) the value of the transcript to the defendant in connection with the appeal or trial for which it is sought, and (2) the availability of alternative devices that would fulfill the same functions as a transcript.”
    108 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"In this tradition, our own constitutional guaranties of due process and equal protection both call for procedures in criminal trials which allow no invidious discriminations between persons and different groups of persons. Both equal protection and due process emphasize the central aim of our entire judicial system — all people charged with crime must, so far as the law is concerned, `stand on an equality before the bar of justice in every American court.' ... . There can be no equal justice where the kind of trial a man gets depends on the amount of money he has. " (Emphasis added.)”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “[w]hile trial notes might well provide an adequate substitute for a transcript, the failure to make such notes does not bar an indigent prisoner from claiming the right to a free transcript.”
    3 later decisions 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.