Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 435 F.2d 453 - Smith v. Cox

Smith v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis

435 F.2d 453 · 1970

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 1 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2020 · most notably United States v. Dioguardi (1974), Slayton v. Smith (1971)

28 federal appellate · 1 district · 11 state decisions

430197019801990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Relies on Anders v. California · Boykin v. Alabama · Blockburger v. United States · Townsend v. Sain · McCarthy 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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"And even it petitioner's acts could have been treated as constituting the commission of a single crime on the theory that Melton was custodian of Mills' safe, its contents and other merchandise, petitioner may not now claim that he was placed in jeopardy twice. Having pleaded guilty to the indictments, petitioner may not now go beyond the facts alleged therein and admitted by him and complain about how he may have been charged, or the theories under which he may have been convicted had he elected to stand trial on pleas of not guilty. We hold, therefore, that petitioner was not placed in double jeopardy, because he was charged and admitted to guilt of two separate offenses."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Even before Boykin [v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 , 89 S.Ct. 1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969)], it was constitutionally required that guilty pleas be entered with a knowledge of their consequences, see Pennsylvania ex rel. Herman v. Claudy, 350 U.S. 116, 120 , 76 S.Ct. 223 , 100 L.Ed. 126 (1956), and in this circuit the burden of proof of knowledge and understanding was on the state. Bailey v. MacDougall, 392 F.2d 155, 159 (4th Cir.), cert. den., 393 U.S. 847 , 89 S.Ct. 133 , 21 L.Ed.2d 118 (1968).” Id., at 458.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “His argument is two-fold. First, he argues that his first counsel, appointed to represent him on appeal, did nothing and permitted the appeal to lapse. Undoubtedly, this was ineffective representation, but this denial of petitioner’s rights was subsequently redressed. New counsel was appointed, and application for a writ of error was prepared and filed. Although it was denied on the merits, it was considered out of time, and petitioner is entitled to no more.”
    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.