63 Wis. 2d 304 - Hall v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
February 1983
most recently cited
19 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · Harrington v. California · 49 Wis. 2d 263 - McCleary v. State
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]his court has indicated that a conflict of interest at sentencing per se renders counsel ineffective, and it is not required that actual prejudice be shown. All that need be shown is that there was a conflict of interest and that, as a result, the defendant was deprived of the undivided loyalty of his counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Defense counsel’s colloquy with the sentencing judge [and in this case, opposing counsel] reveals an actual conflict of interest, which prevented Hall from having effective counsel at this stage of the proceedings. 2”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.