Abel v. Wyrick’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

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

1. “'The only thing I'm interested in is what you have told me; you violated your probation. There's no use wasting any more time, I'm going to revoke your probation. What they do with you up at the institution, I don't know. But a rule is a rule.' " Id. at 419. In holding that the sentencing judge failed to consider alternatives to incarceration, as required by Gagnon and Morrissey, the court stated: "Of course, the judge, in his discretion, may have concluded, after weighing the alternatives, that none would be appropriate and that incarceration was the only realistic alternative. But at least more than a cursory consideration of alternatives is required.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 567 F. Supp. 882 - Romano v. Black · Romano v. Black

2. “first, an indigent probationer will be informed of his right to request that counsel be appointed; second, presumptively, counsel should be appointed if the probationer makes a timely and colorable claim that (1) he has not committed the alleged violation of the conditions upon which he is at liberty, or (2) even if the violation is a matter of public record or is uncontested, there are substantial reasons which justified or mitigated the violation and make revocation inappropriate, and that the reasons are complex or otherwise difficult to develop or present; third, that in considering a request for the appointment of counsel, the judge should consider, especially in doubtful cases, whether the probationer can speak effectively for himself; and fourth, if the request for counsel is refused, then the grounds for the refusal should be stated succinctly in the record. Finally, considerable discretion must be allowed the judge.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Boyle v. Sutherland

3. “a) written notice of the claimed violations of parole; b) disclosure to the parolee of evidence against him; c) opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence; d) the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses (unless the hearing officer specifically finds good cause for not allowing confrontation); e) a “neutral and detached” hearing body such as a traditional parole board, members of which need not be judicial officers or lawyers; and f) a written statement by the factfind-ers as to the evidence relied on and the reasons for revoking the parole.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. MacK v. Purkett