Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 435 F.2d 698 - United States v. Collins

United States v. Collins’s Empirical Analysis

435 F.2d 698 · 1970

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
March 1983
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Ungar v. Sarafite · Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Vance · United States v. Jones · United States v. Cook

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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The matter of continuance is traditionally within the discretion of the trial judge, and it is not every denial of a request for more time that violates due process even if the party fails to offer evidence or is compelled to defend without counsel. Contrariwise, a myopic insistence upon expeditiousness in the face of a justifiable request for delay can render the right to defend with counsel an empty formality. There are no mechanical tests for deciding when a denial of a continuance is so arbitrary as to violate due process. The answer must be found in the circumstances present in every case, particularly in the reasons presented to the trial judge at the time the request is denied. $ ‡ ‡ ⅜ * ‡ These matters are, of course, arguable, and other judges in other courts might well grant a continuance in these circumstances. But the fact that something is arguable does not make it unconstitutional. Given the deference necessarily due a state trial judge in regard to the denial or granting of continuances, we cannot say these denials denied [petitioner] of due process of law. * * * * * * Due process demands that the defendant be afforded a fair opportunity to obtain the assistance of counsel of his choice to prepare and conduct his defense. The constitutional mandate is satisfied so long as the accused is afforded a fair or reasonable opportunity to obtain particular counsel, and so long as there is no arbitrary action prohibiting the effective use of such counsel, (citations omi”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(t)he answer must be found in the circumstances (of) each case, particularly in the reasons presented to the trial judge.”
    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.