James v. Headley’s Empirical Analysis
410 F.2d 325 · 1969
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2001 · most notably Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972), Rodriguez v. ROSENBLATT (1971)
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 19 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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. § 1 · 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 401 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · Gault · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Johnson v. State of New Jersey
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any misdemeanor, the penalty for which does not exceed imprisonment for a period of six months or a fine of not more than $500, or both . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"But even though the two rights derive from the same provisions of our Federal Constitution, they are not of equal significance when it comes to the matter of obtaining a fair trial. It is conceivable that a fair trial may be had before an impartial judge without a jury, but it is hardly conceivable that a person ignorant in the field of law can adequately defend himself without the assistance of counsel. Consequently, we do not consider the cases involving the right to a jury trial controlling in this area.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The constitutional mandate of the Sixth Amendment is' without. doubt applicable to petty offenses, but * * * adequate, representation may be afforded defendants in such cases without the need for providing for compensation for counsel. * * * Congress, if it could, never intended to change the petty offender’s right to counsel; it merely limited the cases for which compensation was to be provided.” (Italics in original.)”
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.