Moses v. Helgemoe’s Empirical Analysis
562 F.2d 62 · 1976
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 1999
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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 Chapman v. State of California · Coleman v. Alabama · Brady v. United States · Tillman v. United States · Chin Kee v. Massachusetts
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘[A] reviewing court is permitted to scrutinize the possibility of prejudice arising from the diminution of tactical alternatives available to subsequently appointed counsel and, if such possibility is found beyond a reasonable doubt merely speculative or hypothetical, to declare the absence of counsel harmless error.’ ” Moses v. Helgemoe (1st Cir. 1976), 562 F.2d 62, 64 , quoting Chin Kee v. Commonwealth (1st Cir. 1969), 407 F.2d 10, 14 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. M.L.K.
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.