Ward v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 63 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably Oldham v. State (1998), Stearnes v. Clinton (1989)
5 federal appellate · 63 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 Cuyler v. Sullivan · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Armstrong v. Manzo · Evitts v. Lucey · McKane v. Durston
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An attorney appointed under this subsection shall represent the defendant until charges are dismissed, the defendant is acquitted, appeals are exhausted, or the attorney is relieved of his duties by the court or replaced by other counsel.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he absence of [an appellate record] renders appellant's appeal a `meaningless ritual.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Guerra v. State · Turner v. State““Although we have found that appellant’s trial counsel remained appellant’s counsel on appeal for failure to withdraw, it is quite obvious that counsel believed that his representation of appellant had ceased after trial. Consequently, an in-depth analysis of whether the appellant received effective assistance of counsel is unnecessary as it is apparent that the appellant as a practical matter received no assistance....””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ex Parte Lopez
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.