United States v. Simpson’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 28 U.S.C. § 1654
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Faretta v. California · Neder v. United States · California v. Trombetta · Arizona v. Youngblood
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, the defendant must “clearly and unequivocally” inform the district court of his intention to represent himself. Second, the request must be timely and not for the purpose of delay. Third, the court must conduct a comprehensive formal inquiry to ensure that the defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowingly and intelligently made. Finally, the defendant must be able and willing to abide by rules of procedure and courtroom protocol.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to justify suppression, [the defendant] needed to attack the veracily of the police affiant, not the informant”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A motion for self-representation is timely if it is made before the jury is impaneled[.]”
1 later decision 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.