Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 404 U.S. 55 - Harris v. Washington

Harris v. Washington’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

368
cited by 368 later decisions
69
cited 69 times by the Supreme Court
27
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

77 federal appellate · 12 district · 169 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 368 later decisions (69 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), Abney v. United States (1977)

77 federal appellate · 12 district · 169 state decisions — followed in 27 states

185019711980199020002010decided

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 Ashe v. Swenson · Benton v. Maryland · Mercantile National Bank at Dallas v. C H Langdeau Republic National Bank of Dallas · Hoag v. State of New Jersey

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

  1. “"Collateral estoppel.... means simply that when a[n] issue of ultimate fact has once been determined by a valid and final judgment, that issue cannot again be litigated between the same parties in any future lawsuit.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the constitutional guarantee [against double jeopardy] applies, irrespective of whether the jury considered all relevant evidence, and irrespective of the good faith of the [government] in bringing successive prosecutions.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Since the state courts have finally rejected a claim that the Constitution forbids a second trial of the petitioner, a claim separate and apart from the question whether the petitioner may constitutionally be convicted of the crimes with which he is charged, our jurisdiction is properly invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1257.”
    4 later decisions 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.