Adamson v. Ricketts’s Empirical Analysis
758 F.2d 441 · 1985
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 4 district · 7 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Chapman v. State of California · North Carolina v. Pearce · Gregg v. Georgia · Santobello v. New York
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In cases involving rejected or withdrawn plea bargains where a defendant receives a harsher sentence than that tendered to him, the procedural safeguards of Pearce have been found to have no application, [citations omitted]. Where a defendant makes a voluntary choice to reject or withdraw from a plea bargain, is convicted of the crimes alleged against him, and receives an otherwise lawful sentence for those crimes, he has no cause to complain that the sentence received is harsher than that originally tendered.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“limited to the question whether they are so unprincipled or arbitrary as to somehow violate the United States Constitution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jeffers v. Ricketts“has gone to great lengths to precisely define and correctly apply Ariz.Rev.Stat. Sec. 13-703(F)(6).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jeffers v. Ricketts
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.