Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 504 P2D 855 - Mead v. State

Mead v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
May 1987
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Bruton v. United States · Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Harrington v. California · Carafas v. J

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

  1. “The only fact which distinguishes the case at bar from Bruton is that Mead's own confessions were admitted into evidence along with the confessions of his nontestifying codefendants. In our view, this circumstance does not appear to have any bearing on the fact that Mead was denied the right to confront and cross-examine Henderson and Schott concerning their confessions, both of which implicated him in the burglaries. Henderson and Schott were in effect unavailable to testify since Mead could not compel them to take the stand. And Mead had no actual opportunity to cross-examine them since they did not take the stand.”
    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.