United States v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
431 F.3d 976 · 2005
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Simmons v. United States · Thomas v. Arn · Grupo Mexicano Desarrollos v. Alliance Bond Fund Inc
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.
“(1) the timeliness of the motion, (2) the adequacy of the court’s inquiry into the matter, (3) the extent of the conflict between the attorney and client and whether it was so great that it resulted in a total lack of communication preventing an adequate defense, and (4) the balancing of these factors with the public’s interest in the prompt and efficient administration of justice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Henness v. Bagley
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.