Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 408 F.2d 325 - Scalf v. Bennett

Scalf v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis

408 F.2d 325 · 1969

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
4
states following
June 1982
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently June 1982 · most notably United States v. Easter (1976), Raymond L. Buckelew and James Laney Jenkins v. United States of America, Judson Lee Drane v. United States (1978)

31 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

550196919701980decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Fay v. Noia · United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Lisenba v. People of State of California · Desist 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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Habeas corpus relief on the ground of incompetency of counsel or denial of effective counsel will be granted `only when the trial was a farce, or a mockery of justice, or was shocking to the conscience of the reviewing court, or the purported representation was only perfunctory, in bad faith, a sham, a pretense, or without adequate opportunity for conference or preparation.'" Scalf v. Bennett, 408 F.2d 325, 327-28 (8th Cir. 1969) quoting from White v. McHan, 386 F.2d 817, 818 (5th Cir. 1967) (Emphasis supplied).”
    4 later decisions 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.