Javor v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
724 F.2d 831 · 1984
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2019 · most notably Strickland v. Washington (1984), United States v. Swanson (1991)
41 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 15 states
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. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Chambers v. Mississippi · Pennsylvania v. Mimms · Holloway v. Arkansas · Geders 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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'inherent' at some point, 'because unconscious or sleeping counsel is equivalent to no counsel at all'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“when an attorney for a criminal defendant sleeps through a substantial portion of the trial, such conduct is inherently prejudicial and thus no separate showing of prejudice is necessary.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘that petitioner’s trial counsel was asleep or dozing, and not alert to proceedings, during a substantial part of the trial ... that by reason thereof petitioner was not assisted by counsel at a substantial portion of the trial, including some occasions when evidence relevant to the prosecution case against defendant and very likely to his defense was being elicited and the participation of trial counsel (to observe witnesses, listen to testimony, consider the posing of objections, prepare cross-examination of witnesses, consider the preparation of rebuttal evidence, and prepare argument on such evidence) was proper...”
2 later decisions 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.