Selsor v. Kaiser’s Empirical Analysis
81 F.3d 1492 · 1996
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Alvie James Hale v. Gary Gibson (2000), McFarland v. Yukins (2004)
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 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 Strickland v. Washington · Chapman v. State of California · Glasser v. United States · Bruton v. United States · Cuyler v. Sullivan
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There was no inquiry into how Selsor’s defense might be adversely affected by the joint representation even though the potential conflict of interest was patent. As defense counsel noted, Dodson would assert an insanity defense which required him to admit his role in the offenses, including his participation with Selsor. Sel-sor’s defense was to deny any involvement. These inconsistent positions could color the judgment of the defense attorneys throughout the trial. An adequate consideration of the conflict would have revealed the impossibility of going forward with the joint representation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wisehart v. State“The Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel encompasses the correlative right to representation that is free from conflicts of interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“searching review ... demonstrat[ing] that counsel's fear for his effectiveness [wa]s groundless.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Crislip v. Newton
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.