Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 672 SW2D 336 - Commonwealth v. Stamps

Commonwealth v. Stamps’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently June 2019

3 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

401984199020002010decided

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 Boykin v. Alabama · Ross v. Moffitt · Roberts v. Florida · Smith v. Commonwealth · Commonwealth v. Gadd

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

  1. “(1) A needy person who is being detained by a law enforcement officer ... is entitled: (a) To be represented by an attorney to the same extent as a person having his own counsel is so entitled; .... [[Image here]] (2) A needy person who is entitled to be represented by an attorney under subsection (1) of this section is entitled: [[Image here]] (c) To be represented in any other post-conviction ... proceeding that the attorney and the needy person considers [sic] appropriate. However, if the counsel appointed in such post-conviction ... remedy, with the court involved, determines that it is not a proceeding that a reasonable person with adequate means would be willing to bring at his own expense, there shall be no further right to be represented by counsel under the provisions of this chapter.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the answer raises a material issue of fact that cannot be determined on the face of the record the court shall grant a prompt hearing and, if the movant is without counsel of record and if financially unable to employ counsel, shall upon specific written request by the movant appoint counsel to represent the movant in the proceeding, including appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Thus, we are squarely confronted with whether our decision in Commonwealth v. Ivey mandates automatic reversal in every case where a defendant proceeding in forma pauperis has filed an RCR 11.42 proceeding and requested the appointment of counsel, but the trial court has failed to provide one.”
    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.