Fuller v. Diesslin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 13 state decisions

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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] district court must pass on the issue whether or not to allow a waiver of a conflict of interest by a criminal defendant not with the wisdom of hindsight after the trial has taken place, but in the murkier pre-trial context when relationships between parties are seen through a glass, darkly. The likelihood and dimensions of nascent conflicts of interest are notoriously hard to predict, even for those thoroughly familiar with criminal trials.... For these reasons we think the district court must be allowed substantial latitude in refusing waivers of conflicts of interest ... in the more common cases where a potential for conflict exists which may or may not burgeon into an actual conflict as the trial progresses.... ... The District Court must recognize a presumption in favor of [a defendant’s] counsel of choice, but that presumption may be overcome not only by a demonstration of actual conflict but by a showing of a serious potential for conflict.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Voigt

2. “[E]ven if the right to counsel of choice exists for the purpose of securing effective assistance of counsel to the defendant ... the two rights are not identical. We do not understand the language in Wheat to mean that the right to counsel of choice is important only insofar as it secures the right to effective assistance of counsel. Rather, it could be fairly interpreted to mean that, although the core value in the sixth amendment is effective assistance of counsel, the amendment also comprehends other related rights, such as the “right to select and be represented by one’s preferred attorney.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 719 F. Supp. 2d 571 - United States v. Puryear

3. “United States Constitution, Amendment VI . It is well-settled that a component of this right is the protection of a defendant's opportunity to obtain counsel of choice. Powell v. Alabama (1932), 287 U.S. 45 , 53 , 53 S.Ct. 55 , 58 , 77 L.Ed. 158 . The Sixth Amendment does not, however,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Roble, Unpublished Decision (1-27-2006)