United States v. Barnes’s Empirical Analysis
610 F.2d 888 · 1979
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently October 1996
19 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Wainwright v. Sykes · Townsend v. Sain · Jackson v. Denno · Fay v. Noia
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“On remand, therefore, the district court may pursue either of two procedures. The court may first determine whether Barnes’ statements were voluntary and hence admissible at trial. If so, appellant is entitled to no relief. Alternatively, the court may first determine whether the failure to raise the voluntariness. issue either at trial or on appeal should preclude consideration of that claim in this § 2255 petition. If so, the court may deny relief without inquiring into the merits of appellant’s contentions.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The evidentiary hearing on the waiver issue will naturally focus on why counsel failed to object to the introduction of Barnes’ statements on voluntariness grounds. Although the precise inquiry will depend on what standard the court deems applicable, the relevant questions might include: (1) whether the omission was or is susceptible of being interpreted as an intentional trial tactic, (2) whether it was an advertent (conscious and knowing) decision by counsel, (3) whether it was negligent or unreasonable, (4) whether it amounted to ineffective assistance, and (5) whether appellant was apprised of counsel’s intention to acquiesce in the admission of his statements at trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“test of Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 , 83 S.Ct. 822, 9 L.Ed.2d 837 (1963), or the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.