Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 719 P2D 1094 - Barber v. Cooper

Barber v. Cooper’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
October 2004
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently October 2004

1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

20198619902000decided

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 Alexander v. Wilson · Alire v. People · People v. Lewis · Lander v. Evans

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

  1. “If a prisoner has violated both state and federal law, he is subject to prosecution by both sovereigns and may not complain of the order in which each sovereign proceeds against him.... [T]he federal conviction took place while petitioner was on escape status from the Colorado penitentiary. Because the petitioner has no right to serve one sentence before another, and no prejudice or unfairness results from the state’s refusal to accept petitioner upon his return from California, we hold the district court acted properly in dismissing petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and/or rule to show cause.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “A defendant who has been convicted of [erimes in more than one jurisdiction] does not have a constitutional right to serve one sentence before the other. These matters are decided as matters of comity between the state and federal jurisdictions.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[There is no requirement that a sentence run concurrently with a sentence imposed by a foreign jurisdiction.”
    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.