Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 443 F.2d 1079 - United States ex rel. Bey v. Connecticut State Board of Parole

United States ex rel. Bey v. Connecticut State Board of Parole’s Empirical Analysis

443 F.2d 1079 · 1971

Citation profile

91
cited by 91 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
July 2014
most recently cited

44 federal appellate · 3 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 91 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2014 · most notably Morrissey v. Brewer (1972), Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex (1979)

44 federal appellate · 3 district · 16 state decisions

75019711980199020002010decided

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 Gideon v. Wainwright · Goldberg v. Kelly · Williams v. People of State of New York · Sanders v. United States · Townsend v. Burke

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

  1. “It is not sophistic to attach greater importance to a person's justifiable reliance in maintaining his conditional freedom so long as he abides by the conditions of his release, than to his mere anticipation or hope of freedom.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Unlike a parole release decision, a necessary precondition to a parolee's reincarceration is a finding that he has violated a condition of his parole. The parolee's loss of his conditional freedom turns in large part on a retrospective determination of a specific factual question. In contrast, the parole release decision, as emphasized above, is a prognostic determination with respect to one's suitability for parole and is based on a complex of tangible and intangible factors and involves the discretionary application of knowledge derived from such fields as psychology, criminology, sociology and penology. While the parole revocation proceeding basically is concerned with making a factual determination with respect to parole violation, parole decision-making centers on making a diagnostic and predictive determination with respect to whether the rehabilitation of the prisoner and the welfare of society generally would be best served by granting the inmate conditional freedom rather than by his physical confinement.”
    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.