Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 425 F.2d 1095 - Joseph E. Mullreed v. George A. Kropp, Warden

Joseph E. Mullreed v. George A. Kropp, Warden’s Empirical Analysis

425 F.2d 1095 · 1970

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
12
states following
January 2020
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 2 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably United States v. Anderson (1975), United States v. Williams (1976)

15 federal appellate · 2 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 12 states

320197019801990200020102020decided

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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Stovall v. Denno · Jackson v. Denno · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Ashe v. Swenson

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

  1. ““We agree that in legal effect the first proceeding is a nullity. The consequences of this are to make retrial upon the same count, robbery unarmed, entirely permissible. This is the rule of United States v. Ball, supra, 163 U.S. 662 , 16 S.Ct. 1192 , 41 L. Ed. 300 . . . The same would be true if this had been a jury proceeding subsequently overturned on constitutional grounds. Nonetheless the holding of Green v. United States, supra, 355 U.S. 184 , 78 S.Ct. 221 , 2 L. Ed. 199 , is that the conviction on the lesser, or more properly, refusal to convict on the greater, would bar a subsequent prosecution and sentence on the greater charge.” 425 F.2d at 1101 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. ““We think this case (Benton) goes beyond the concededly important consideration of the integrity of the truth determining process; it goes to the very quick of a long and cherished heritage in the administration of criminal justice, namely, the State’s extended deprivation of liberty as the price for demanding successfully a trial process free of Constitutional infirmity. Therefore we conclude that Benton applies retroactively and is controlling here.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “There can be no doubt of the 'retroactivity' of the Court's decision in Benton v. Maryland. In North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 , [89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656,] decided the same day as Benton, the Court unanimously accorded fully 'retroactive' effect to the Benton doctrine.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.