Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 571 F.2d 1263 - Strader v. Troy

Strader v. Troy’s Empirical Analysis

571 F.2d 1263 · 1978

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
2
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

35 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh (1988), Anyanwutaku v. Moore (1998)

35 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

27019781980199020002010decided

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 Monroe v. Pape · Preiser v. Rodriguez · United States v. Tucker · Brewer v. Williams · Argersinger v. Hamlin

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

  1. “In order to comply with Stepheney, the (sentencing) judge must be able to say without qualification that the sentence was uninfluenced by the allegedly invalid prior convictions.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “regardless of the F.B.I. report, a lesser sentence would not have been imposed and to send (Strader) back for resentencing would result in the same sentence . . . and . . . would serve no useful purpose. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “feels there would not have been a lesser sentence (had the judge) been unaware of the prior convictions or had assumed their invalidity.”
    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.