United States v. Iles’s Empirical Analysis
906 F.2d 1122 · 1990
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 56 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 145 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Cowans (1999), State v. Conway (2006)
43 federal appellate · 56 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 26 U.S.C. § 7203 · 26 U.S.C. § 7206
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Glasser v. United States · Gregory v. Helvering · United States v. Harriss · United States v. Batchelder
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 145 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An indigent defendant has no right to have a particular attorney represent him and therefore must demonstrate `good cause' to warrant substitution of counsel.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the timeliness of the motion, (2) the adequacy of the court’s inquiry into the matter, (3) the extent of the conflict between the attorney and client and whether it was so great that it resulted in a total lack of communication preventing an adequate defense, and (4) the balancing of these factors with the public’s interest in the prompt and efficient administration of justice.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When an indigent defendant makes a timely and good faith motion requesting that appointed counsel be discharged and new counsel appointed, the trial court clearly has a responsibility to determine the reasons for defendant's dissatisfaction with his current counsel.”
7 later decisions 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.