Hoskins v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis
485 F.2d 1186 · 1973
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably United States v. Avalos (1976), 378 So. 2d 1173 - Turner v. State (1979)
22 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions
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 Chapman v. State of California · Barker v. Wingo · United States v. Wade · United States v. Marion · Klopfer v. State of North Carolina
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[T]here must be some point of coalescence of the other three factors in a movant's favor, at which prejudice — either actual or presumed — becomes totally irrelevant. And so we hold."”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“At some juncture in a criminal prosecution the government's lengthy, inexplicable delay, in the face of vigorous demands for an immediate trial, is so offensive to the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a speedy trial that a Court must intervene regardless of whether the defendant has been incarcerated, subjected to public scorn and obloquy, or impaired in his ability to defend himself. Hoskins v. Wainwright, supra, 485 F.2d at 1189 n. 3.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In many respects, modern speedy trial law began with Barker v. Wingo, 1972, 407 U.S. 514 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 , 33 L.Ed.2d 101 . There, speaking for a unanimous Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Powell enunciated the four criteria which must be evaluated in each case, on an ad hoc basis, to assess a speedy trial claim: (i) ‘Length of delay, (ii) the reason for the delay, (iii) the defendant’s assertion of his right [footnote omitted], and (iv) prejudice to the defendant.’ 407 U.S. at 530 , 92 S.Ct. at 2192 , 33 L. Ed.2d at 117 [footnote omitted].””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.