Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 436 F.3d 1168 - Hain v. Mullin

Hain v. Mullin’s Empirical Analysis

436 F.3d 1168 · 2006

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
July 2022
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2022

13 federal appellate · 2 district ·

140200620102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Duncan v. Walker · Connecticut National Bank v. Germain · Albernaz v. United States · Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

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

  1. “(a)(1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law to the contrary, in every criminal action in which a defendant is charged with a crime which may be punishable by death, a defendant who is or becomes financially unable to obtain adequate representation or investigative, expert, or other reasonably necessary services at any time either— (A) before judgment; or (B) after the entry of a judgment imposing a sentence of death but before the execution of that judgment; shall be entitled to the appointment of one or more attorneys and the furnishing of such other services in accordance with subsections (b) through (£). (2) In any post conviction proceeding under section 2254 or 2255 of title 28, United States Code, seeking to vacate or set aside a death sentence, any defendant who is or becomes financially unable to obtain adequate representation or investigative, expert, or other reasonably necessary services shall be entitled to the appointment of one or more attorneys and the furnishing of such other services in accordance with subsections (b) through (f). (e) Unless replaced by similarly qualified counsel upon the attorney’s own motion or upon motion of the defendant, each attorney so appointed shall represent the defendant throughout every subsequent stage of available judicial proceedings, including pretrial proceedings, trial, sentencing, motions for new trial, appeals, applications for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States, and all available post-con”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “did not want condemned men and women to be abandoned by their counsel at the last moment and left to navigate the sometimes labyrinthine clemency process from their jail cells.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “`[O]ur task is to interpret the words of the statute in light of the purposes Congress sought to serve.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.