29 Va. App. 625 - Miller v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
December 2003
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Smith v. Hooey · Carchman v. Nash New Jersey Department of Corrections · 4 Va. App. 438 - Martin v. Commonwealth · Fowlkes v. Commonwealth
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Once “a detainer has been lodged against [such] prisoner [by the receiving state,] he shall be brought to trial within 180 days after he shall have caused to be delivered [by the sending state] to the prosecuting officer and the appropriate court of the prosecuting officer’s jurisdiction ... his request for a final disposition____” of the pending charges, together with the requisite supporting documentation from the sending state. Code § 53.1-210, Art. 111(a) and (b).... A “detainer” contemplated by the IAD is “a notification filed with the institution in which a prisoner is serving a sentence, advising that he is wanted to face pending criminal charges in another jurisdiction.””
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.