Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 167 F.3d 276 - Burke v. Johnson

Burke v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

167 F.3d 276 · 1999

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently July 2018

6 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

120199920002010decided

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

Relies on Grogan v. Garner · Colorado v. Connelly · Lego v. Twomey · Mitchell v. Toledo Hospital · Town of Newton v. Rumery

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

  1. “We decline to adopt the Third Circuit’s ‘clear and convincing evidence’ standard for several reasons. First, we find that reading the release/dismissal agreement into the record in the context of a plea hearing as was done in this case, should be viewed as the equivalent of a written agreement since judicial supervision provides due process protection against prosecutorial overreaching and insures voluntariness under all but the most unusual circumstances. Therefore, a release under these circumstances should be governed by the same ‘preponder- anee of the evidence’ standard applicable in ordinary civil contract actions. More importantly, we are persuaded that a simple ‘preponderance of evidence’ standard of proof is sufficient for determining whether an on-the-record oral agreement relinquishing the right to pursue a civil action was voluntarily made in light of the fact that this lesser standard applies in determining the vol-untariness of a criminal defendant’s waiver of his constitutional rights. If a preponderance of evidence standard applies when determining if there is a voluntary waiver of a criminal defendant’s constitutional rights, we see no reason for application of an elevated standard where lesser rights are implicated.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[T]he defendant [Burke], his heirs, and assigns warrant ... that he will release now and forever any of the officers associated with the circumstances surrounding this matter, and specifically, Jackson Township Police Department, Chief Johnson, Officer Quigley, Officer West, Detective Vaughn, Montgomery County, the County Commissioners, the Trustees of Jackson Township, and anyone else, so that this is a complete resolution of all matters between the parties in consideration of the State giving up the importa'nt count of felonious assault of a police officer, which is an aggravated felony of the first degree, along with the specification thereto.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the release/dismissal agreement [was] ... entered into as part of a plea agreement”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.