Kaplan v. Bombard’s Empirical Analysis
573 F.2d 708 · 1978
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently July 2003 · most notably United States v. Curcio (1982), Klein v. Harris (1981)
20 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Picard v. Connor · Bankers Trust Co. v. Mallis · Eisenstadt v. Baker · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · Keeble v. United States
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The mere representation of two or more defendants by a single attorney does not automatically give rise to a constitutional deprivation of counsel. It is settled in this Circuit that some specific instance of prejudice, some real conflict of interest, resulting from a joint representation must be shown to exist before it can be said that an appellant has been denied the effective assistance of counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smith v. Regan
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.