Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 279 Ga. 632 - Scandrett v. State

Scandrett v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently October 2020

24 state decisions

130200520102020decided

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 Doggett v. United States · Smith v. Hooey · United States v. Loud Hawk · In re Draffin · Callaway v. State

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

  1. “The test for determining whether a violation of that right has occurred is established by Barker v. Wingo, 407 U. S. 514 (92 SC 2182, 33 LE2d 101) (1972), which sets forth the four relevant factors to be considered: length of the delay; reason for the delay; the defendant’s assertion of the right to a speedy trial; and, prejudice to the defense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The right to a speedy trial attaches at the time of arrest or when formal charges are brought, whichever is earlier.”
    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.