Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 565 F.2d 1283 - United States v. Atkinson

United States v. Atkinson’s Empirical Analysis

565 F.2d 1283 · 1977

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2015

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

7019771980199020002010decided

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. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952 · 21 U.S.C. § 963

Relies on Glasser v. United States · United States v. Lovano · United States v. Truglio · Sawyer v. Brough · United States v. Luciano

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.

  1. “The appellants themselves retained their counsel which resulted in the multiple representation, and they, more than anyone, including the court, were in a position to know what facts might be developed at trial. Apparently they concluded that such representation was advantageous, and it should be noted that at no time, either prior to the trial or during the course thereof, was the issue of such multiple representation raised in any fashion. [Citation omitted.] Since we discern no conflict of interest or resultant prejudice to any of the appellants, we cannot accept their contention that they were denied the effective assistance of counsel.”
    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.