Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 402 F.2d 113 - Yates v. Breazeale

Yates v. Breazeale’s Empirical Analysis

402 F.2d 113 · 1968

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
February 1983
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 1983

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

40196819701980decided

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 Townsend v. Sain · Haynes v. Washington · United States v. Jackson · Spano v. People of the State of New York · Davis v. North Carolina

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

  1. “"In compliance with the decision of the Mississippi Supreme Court dated the 3rd day of October, 1968, this court has held a hearing in compliance with said decision and is of the opinion and doth find that certain jurors were excused because they stated to the Court on voir dire examination that they had conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death penalty. Said jurors were Otman R. Mallette, Frank L. Maples, and Robert E. Heinrich. "The undersigned judge was the presiding judge at the trial of the herein named defendant and did excuse the above named jurors for cause and for the reason stated by them that they had conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death penalty. In the judgment of this court this does bring said case within the Witherspoon decision."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. 222 So. 2d 145 - Rouse v. State

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.