Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 657 F.2d 21 - Bailey v. Redman

Bailey v. Redman’s Empirical Analysis

657 F.2d 21 · 1981

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Perry v. Leeke (1989), Haney v. State (1991)

16 federal appellate · 13 state decisions — followed in 11 states

22019811990200020102020decided

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 Cuyler v. Sullivan · Geders v. United States · Joseph Skilken & Co. v. City of Toledo · McClain v. United States · United States v. DiLapi

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

  1. “"[It] is one thing to say that a defendant who has been deprived of the guiding hand of counsel need not demonstrate the prejudicial effect of that deprivation; it is quite another to say that he need not show that the challenged order deprived him of counsel he would otherwise have received."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The distinction between the ‘deprivation’ of a right and the ‘prejudice’ that may result thereupon is not a new one... Only an actual conflict of interest would establish [a Sixth Amendment violation]. The court carefully noted [in Sullivan] that its requirement that a defendant show an actual conflict does not constitute a requirement that the defendant demonstrate prejudice [446 U.S.] at 349-50, 100 S.Ct. at 1718—19. A showing of that one has been ‘deprived’ of his right to effective counsel is a predicate to relief; a showing of ‘prejudice’ is not.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[I]n order to obtain relief a petitioner must show a 'deprivation' of his Sixth Amendment rights by demonstrating that he wanted to meet with his attorney but was prevented from doing so by the instruction of the trial judge.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.