Julius v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
755 F.2d 1403 · 1985
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 2016
16 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 Faretta v. California · United States v. Bowdach · United States v. Zielie · Raulerson v. Wainwright · United States v. Gollwitzer
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"As the court said in [ United States v. Bowdach, 561 F.2d 1160 (5th Cir.1977)]: "` Faretta [v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975)] does not hold that a defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to act as co-counsel and we are not willing to extend the reach of the Sixth Amendment to include such a right. " 561 F.2d at 1176 (citation inserted)."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Arthur v. State
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.