Bennett v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
413 F.2d 237 · 1969
Citation profile
13 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 1990
13 federal appellate ·
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. § 2113 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · McCarthy v. United States · Sanders v. United States · Carnley v. Cochran · Von Moltke v. Gillies
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The district judge thoroughly advised both defendants that they had a right to retained counsel or, if they could not afford to hire an attorney, to free court-appointed counsel. Both defendants indicated that they did not want an attorney. The court, after determining that petitioner and his co-defendant had, respectively, ten and eleven years of schooling, then explained the seriousness of the charge and the possibility of a 25 year sentence. Both defendants, in response to the court’s inquiry, indicated that they had had a lawyer in the past and understood the function of an attorney, and that no promises or threats had been made regarding the retaining of counsel. “ * * * After the defendants indicated that they wished to waive their right to an indictment, the court proceeded to submit the ap propriate waiver forms to them. At this time, the court again explained that the defendants had a right to counsel and that they could 'change [their] mind[s] right now and I will appoint an attorney.’ The United States Attorney then read the form and, after being asked by the court if he still desired to waive his right to ‘free counsel appointed by this court to defend’ him, petitioner signed the form. After an explanation by the court of the right to trial by jury, the defendants pleaded guilty. At sentencing, six days later, the court again explained defendants’ right to counsel and both defendants confirmed their earlier waiver. “ * * * [T]he record indicates that adequate war”
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.