72 Misc. 2d 413 - Baker v. Schubin’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently September 2000
23 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 Barker v. Wingo · M/s Bremen v. Zapata off-Shore Company · Smith v. Hooey · Dickey v. Florida · Nelson v. George
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whenever a person has entered upon a term of imprisonment in a penal or correctional institution of a party state, and whenever during the continuance of the term of imprisonment there is pending in any other party state any untried indictment, information or complaint on the basis of which a detain-er has been lodged against the prisoner, he shall be brought to trial within one hundred eighty days after he shall have caused to be delivered to the prosecuting officer and the appropriate court of the prosecuting officer’s jurisdiction written notice of the place of his imprisonment and his request for a final disposition to be made of the indictment, information or complaint: Provided that for good cause shown in open court, the prisoner or his counsel being present, the court having jurisdiction of the matter may grant any necessary or reasonable continuance. The request of the prisoner shall be accompanied by a certificate of the appropriate official having custody of the prisoner, stating the term of commitment under which the prisoner is being held, the time already served, the time remaining to be served on the sentence, the amount of good time earned, the time of parole eligibility of the prisoner, and any decisions of the state parole agency relating to the prisoner, [emphasis added]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hickey v. State““ ‘[A] prison inmate with a detainer filed against him because of outstanding charges in another jurisdiction may suffer several disabilities, ranging from mandatory maximum-security classification to exclusion from vocational rehabilitation programs and even to possible ineligibility for parole.’ ” Matter of Baker v. Schubin, 72 Misc. 2d 413, 416 , 339 N.Y.S.2d 360 (1972), quoting Wexler & Hershey, Criminal Detainers in a Nutshell, 7 Crim. L. Bull. 753 (1971).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sweat v. Darr
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.