James v. Brigano’s Empirical Analysis
470 F.3d 636 · 2006
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Williams v. Taylor · Faretta v. California · Bell Warden v. Cone · 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“was attempting to deal with appointed counsel that had stated he was unprepared to go to trial and a trial court judge intent on going forward with trial regardless of appointed counsel’s preparedness. As such, [petitioner’s] waiver was not made knowingly and intelligently, with “eyes wide open”; the choice between unprepared counsel and self-representation is no choice at all. Fowler v. Collins, 253 F.3d 244, 249-50 (6th Cir.2001) (citing Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975)). Contrary to the Warden’s assertions, Fowler is not based on a reading of Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708 , 68 S.Ct. 316 , 92 L.Ed. 309 (1948), but instead on an application of Faretta , which looks at all of the circumstances surrounding waiver of counsel to ensure that such waiver was knowing and intelligent.”
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.