Carlson v. Jess’s Empirical Analysis
526 F.3d 1018 · 2008
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Ungar v. Sarafite · Wheat v. United States · Morris v. Slappy
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Trial judges necessarily require a great deal of latitude in scheduling trials. Not the least of their problems is that of assembling the witnesses, lawyers, and jurors at the same place at the same time, and this burden counsels against continuances except for compelling reasons. Consequently, broad discretion must be granted trial courts on matters of continuances; only an unreasoning and arbitrary “insistence upon expeditiousness in the face of a justifiable request for delay” violates the right to the assistance of counsel [of choice].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he record reveals absolutely no support for the state trial court's determination that Carlson's motion for substitution was based on 'differ ing views of how the case is approached' and 'strategic decision[s].'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“right to select, and be represented by, one's preferred attorney; thus, trial courts must recognize a presumption in favor of a defendant's counsel of choice.”
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.