Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 569 F.3d 162 - Hyatt v. Branker

Hyatt v. Branker’s Empirical Analysis

569 F.3d 162 · 2009

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 2015
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Williams v. Taylor · Edwards v. Arizona · Moran v. Burbine · Beck v. Alabama

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

  1. “€œIf a defendant is wrongly denied his counsel of choice, no showing of prejudice is necessary to establish constitutional error. Such a deprivation is structural error and is complete when the defendant is erroneously prevented from being represented by the lawyer he wants, regardless of the quality of representation he received.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “capital defendants have a constitutional right to receive a jury instruction on a lesser-included offense “when the evidence unquestionably establishes that the defendant is guilty of a serious, violent offense-but leaves some doubt with respect to an element that would justify conviction of a capital offense.””
    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.