Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 607 F.2d 1081 - Harris v. Young

Harris v. Young’s Empirical Analysis

607 F.2d 1081 · 1979

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
8
states following
May 2021
most recently cited

45 federal appellate · 3 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably State v. Carrione (1982), Torres v. State (1981)

45 federal appellate · 3 district · 15 state decisions

400197919801990200020102020decided

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 Burks v. United States · Green v. United States · United States v. Jorn · Arizona v. Washington · Wade v. Hunter

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

  1. “[i]f obvious and adequate alternatives to aborting the trial were disregarded, this suggests the trial judge acted unjustifiably. Therefore, we must examine the alternatives to a mistrial.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““In determining whether the trial judge exercised sound discretion in declaring a mistrial, we must consider whether there were less drastic alternatives to ending the trial. If less drastic alternatives ... were available, they should have been employed____””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “After jeopardy attaches, the defendant possesses a valued right to have his guilt or innocence determined before the first trier of fact (Citation omitted) ... Because the Double Jeopardy Clause makes no distinction between bench and jury trials, the fact that [the accused’s] trials were before the same judge is immaterial to a determination whether his second trial violated the Fifth Amendment. (Citations omitted) After jeopardy attached at the ... trial, [the accused] possessed a valued right to have the judge decide his case that day, based upon the proof the Commonwealth could adduce.”
    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.