Byrd v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis
428 F.2d 1017 · 1970
Citation profile
127 federal appellate · 2 district · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 192 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably United States v. Haldeman (1976), United States v. Isaacs (1974)
127 federal appellate · 2 district · 29 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 Bruton v. United States · Johnson v. State of New Jersey · Schaffer v. United States · Namet v. United States · Wenzler v. Pitchess
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 192 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“more than a gleam of possibility in the defendant's eye,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) Does the movant intend or desire to have the codefendant testify? How must his intent be made known to the court, and to what extent must the court be satisfied that it is bona fide? (2) Will the projected testimony of the codefendant be exculpatory in nature, and how significant must the effect be? How does the defendant show the nature of the projected testimony and its significance? Must he in some way validate the proposed testimony so as to give it some stamp of verity[?]. (3) To what extent, and in what manner, must it be shown that if severance is granted there is likelihood that the code-fendant will testify? (4) What are the demands of effective judicial administration and economy of judicial effort? Related to this is the matter of timeliness in raising the question of severance. (5) If a joint trial is held, how great is the probability that a codefendant will plead guilty at or immediately before trial and thereby prejudice the defendant, either by cross-defendant prejudice or by surprise as it relates to trial preparation?”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[c]redibility is for the jury, but the judge is not required to sever on patent fabrications,” the government claims that the trial judge could properly consider his own assessment of Brandon’s credibility in ruling on Martin's motion for a mistrial. Even aside from our holding on this point in King , however, which the government does not address, there is no basis in this record for dismissing as”
2 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.