Washington v. Clemmer’s Empirical Analysis
339 F.2d 715 · 1964
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently July 1999 · most notably Coleman v. Burnett (1973), Frank A. Tate v. United States of America, Robert M. Edelin v. United States (1966)
38 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 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 28 U.S.C. § 332 · 28 U.S.C. § 753
Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Brinegar v. United States · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Douglas v. People of State of California · Costello v. United States
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * a preliminary examination shall be held * * * to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the arrested person has committed it”. (Emphasis added).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[l]ikely to be called on this basis, in addition to alibi witneses, are the complainant and other material witnesses named in the complaint who for some reason have not been called by the Government.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Crump v. Anderson · Ross v. Sirica“makes it difficult, if not impossible, to review the * * * finding of probable cause. And verbatim recording of testimony at an early stage of the process perpetuates the fresh memory of witnesses, making it available in case of subsequent death, disability, or flight, and allowing impeachment or refreshing of recollection at trial. Accordingly, early recording also serves to discourage threats against witnesses and suborning of perjury. And even if the absence of a transcript might ultimately be found not prejudicial, obviously it is not possible to predict such an eventuality, and the Commissioner should therefore ordinarily grant a request for a reporter.”
1 later decision 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.