Bailey v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
3
states following
January 2018
most recently cited
2 district · 6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Harris v. New York · Luce v. United States · New Jersey v. Portash · Lovely v. United States
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘[b]ecause an accused’s decision whether to testify seldom turns on the resolution of one factor ... a reviewing court cannot assume that the adverse ruling motivated a defendant’s decision not to testify.’ ” Bailey, 699 A.2d at 399 (quoting Luce, 469 U.S. at 42 , 105 S.Ct. 460 ). Third,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the prosecutor might well have decided not to introduce into the record material which would bring with it a potentially thorny appellate issue, and which would thus have created the danger that a conviction would be reversed on appeal”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Holley“[i]f, for example, the [g]overnment's case is strong, and the defendant is subject to impeachment by other means, a prosecutor might elect not to use an arguably inadmissible prior conviction”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Holley
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.