Smith v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
689 F.2d 59 · 1982
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably 173 W. Va. 43 - State v. Kopa (1983), Smith v. Al Lockhart (1991)
12 federal appellate · 4 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
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Wainwright v. Sykes · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Holloway v. Arkansas
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The rule that harmless error has no application to ineffective assistance claims due to conflict in counsel’s interests follows from the elemental observation that attorneys burdened with conflicting considerations are forced to refrain from singleminded pursuit of a single defendant’s claims. The harm proceeds not so much from what counsel did in light of the conflict but rather from what counsel did not do. This differs from the normal case where “the error occurs at trial and its scope is readily identifiable.” Holloway, 435 U.S. at 490 [ 98 S.Ct. at 1182 ],”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[i]n the realm of the Sixth Amendment, when an objection to joint representation is properly raised and dismissed without a searching review, which can demonstrate that counsel's fear for his effectiveness is groundless, a constitutional violation occurs.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Selsor v. Kaiser“take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk [of conflict] was too remote to warrant separate counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Selsor v. Kaiser
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.