Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 643 S.W.2d 806 - State v. Bolin

State v. Bolin’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
3
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably Doe v. Phillips (2006), State v. Collins (1984)

1 federal appellate · 36 state decisions

1501983199020002010decided

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 Barker v. Wingo · Sibron v. State of New York Peters · United States v. Marion · Cooper v. State of California · Oregon v. Hass

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

  1. ““A balancing test necessarily compels courts to approach speedy trial cases on an ad hoc basis. We can do little more than identify some of the factors which courts should assess in determining whether a particular defendant has been deprived of his right. Though some might express them in different ways, we identify four such factors: Length of delay, the reason for the delay, the defendant’s assertion of his right, and prejudice to the defendant. The length of the delay is to some extent a triggering mechanism. Until there is some delay which is presumptively prejudicial, there is no necessity for inquiry into the other factors that go into the balance.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The right to a speedy trial is generically different from any of the other rights enshrined in the Constitution for the protection of the accused.... ... [Ujnlike the right to counsel or the right to be free from compelled self-incrimination, deprivation of the right to a speedy trial does not per se prejudice the accused’s ability to defend himself.”
    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.