Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 484 FSUPP 871 - Bishop v. Mazurkiewicz

Bishop v. Mazurkiewicz’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 1980
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Sparf v. United States · Public Broadcasting Service v. Network Project · Tate v. United States · Hill v. United States · Thevis 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““[i]f some defendants receive the benefit of such a jury instruction the Fourteenth Amendment mandates that all similarly situated defendants receive it.””
    1 later decision 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.