Alvarez v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis
607 F.2d 683 · 1979
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably State v. Dean (Slip Opinion) (2015), United States v. Fagan (1987)
30 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
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 Kilcullen v. United States · Johnson v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. · Baker v. United States · United States v. Park · United States v. Williamson
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[N]o need for a severance exists until the defendant makes a convincing showing that he has both important testimony to give concerning one count and strong need to refrain from testifying on the other. In making such a showing, it is essential that the defendant present enough information — regarding the nature of the testimony he wishes to give on one count and his reason for not wishing to testify on the other — to satisfy the court that the claim of prejudice is genuine and to enable it intelligently to weigh the considerations of “economy and expedition in judicial administration” against the defendant’s interest in having a free choice with respect to testifying.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“severance is not mandatory simply because a defendant indicates that he has evidence on some counts but not on others.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If it appears that a defendant or the government is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses ... in an indictment or information ... the court may order an election or separate trials of counts ... or provide whatever other relief justice requires.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Holmes v. Scully
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.