Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 532 SW2D 316 - Bailey v. State

Bailey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
1
states following
October 2011
most recently cited

70 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently October 2011 · most notably Alvarado v. State (1995), Crocker v. State (1978)

70 state decisions

45019751980199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Martin v. State · Perez v. United States · Brown v. State · Taylor v. State

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

  1. “[Rjelevant photographs [are not inadmissible] merely because the deceased has been removed to clinical surroundings. Only where the results of surgery have obfuscated the results of the crime will otherwise accurate depictions be inadmissible. The photographs here in question illustrated and clarified the doctor’s description of the injuries, and no error is reflected in their admission.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]n considering the charge on appeal, we will not review isolated portions, but will consider the charge as a whole.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““In view of all the evidence elicited on the trial, it is more than probable that this defence, [sic] even under a proper instruction, would have had no appreciable effect with the jury, and would have been discarded altogether by them in reaching their conclusion. But that was not a question for the determination of the court below, and cannot be with this court on appeal. The provinces of court and jury are plainly and rigidly defined by law, and it is not for the former to act upon a belief that the latter cannot be affected by any particular portion of the evidence.” (Emphasis added).”
    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.