Reed v. State Ex Rel. Ortiz’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2020 · most notably New Mexico Ortiz v. Reed (1998), Reed v. State of New Mexico (2000)
2 federal appellate · 20 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. § 3182 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Younger v. Harris · Wainwright v. Sykes · Fay v. Noia · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Reed faced the deprivation of his life without due process of law if he had remained in Ohio. The New Mexico Constitution cannot tolerate such an outcome. NM Const, art. II, §§ 4 & 18. Moreover, Reed was precluded from seeking safety in Ohio. ... He fled to New Mexico for the express purpose of finding safety. For this reason, Reed properly comes under the protection of Article II, Section 4 of the New Mexico Constitution which guarantees the right “of seeking and obtaining safety.” Reed did not flee from justice. He sought refuge from injustice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[t]he rules of evidence do not apply in ‘proceedings for extradition or rendition.’ Rule 11-1101(D)(2) NMRA 1997. Extradition hearings are not criminal trials in which the guilt or innocence of the defendant is adjudicated. The hearing functions simply to ascertain whether the evidence of criminal conduct by the defendant is sufficient to justify extradition. Thus, the court may consider unsworn statements of absent witnesses as well as hearsay.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lopez“Claiming he was forced to choose between violating parole and being beaten or killed at Lucasville [the Ohio correctional facility], he fled Ohio”
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.