Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 485 FSUPP 866 - McKee v. Harris

McKee v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably State v. Cowans (1999), State v. Ketterer (2006)

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

12019801990200020102020decided

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

Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Gideon v. Wainwright · Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann · Davis v. Alaska

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

  1. “`If the rule were otherwise, appointed counsel could be replaced for doing little more than giving their clients honest advice.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “1) he was denied a fair, trial because the court did not permit him to voice his reasons for his dissatisfaction with appointed counsel; 2) his discharge of appointed counsel did not constitute a waiver of counsel because he informed the court both that he had no confidence in his attorney and that he did not want to proceed pro se; 3) his “waiver” was not scrutinized by the court to determine its voluntariness; 4) he was denied a fair trial when the court refused to appoint new counsel after petitioner discharged Occhetti; 5) the court’s reappointment of Occhetti to finish jury selection implicitly acknowledged petitioner’s need for representation; 6) he was denied the right to effective counsel when a court officer refused to permit his legal advis- or to approach petitioner while he was being cross-examined on the witness stand; 7) he was denied a fair trial by the government’s cross-examination of petitioner on the subject of the persons with whom he was arrested on a federal conspiracy charge; 8) he was denied a fair trial by the court’s refusal to repeat the portion of the charge on “sale” and “possession,” and 9) he was wrongfully forced to waive his defenses of agency and entrapment.”
    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.