Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 891 SO2D 1046 - Leerdam v. State

Leerdam v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Doyle v. Ohio · Michigan v. Long · 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio

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

  1. ““[N]o matter how brief the recess, a defendant in a criminal proceeding must have access to his attorney. The right of a criminal defendant to have reasonably effective attorney representation is absolute and is required at every essential step of the proceedings. Although we understand the desirability of the imposed restriction on a witness or party who is on the witness stand, we find that to deny a defendant consultation with his attorney during any trial recess, even in the middle of his testimony, violates the defendant’s basic right to counsel.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.