Wingate v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis
464 F.2d 209 · 1972
Citation profile
65 federal appellate · 2 district · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 129 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Dowling v. United States (1990), Gen. Elec. Corp. v. COM. PA. HUM. R. COM. (1976)
65 federal appellate · 2 district · 46 state decisions — followed in 21 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 Ashe v. Swenson · Benton v. Maryland · Palko v. State of Connecticut · Rodriguez v. New York · Sealfon v. United States
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 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"It is fundamentally unfair and totally incongruous with our basic concepts of justice to permit the sovereign to offer proof that a defendant committed a specific crime which a jury of that sovereign has concluded he did not commit. Otherwise a person could never remove himself from the blight and suspicious aura which surround an accusation that he is guilty of a specific crime. Wingate was charged with robbing Hellman and Angel and as a result of those charges he endured the perils of trial. He was acquitted of those very charges and that should end the matter."”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Blackburn v. Cross · Lane v. State“to which a defendant is again subjected when the state attempts to prove his guilt by relitigating a settled fact issue which depends upon whether the relitigated issue is one of”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“means simply that when an 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.”
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.