Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 774 P2D 87 - Harvey v. State

Harvey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
2
states following
January 2026
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably Wilson v. State (1994), 583 So. 2d 165 - Adams v. State (1991)

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 33 state decisions

16019891990200020102020decided

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 · United States v. Marion · United States v. DiFrancesco · Klopfer v. State of North Carolina · Harris v. McRae

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

  1. “(1) lengthy pretrial incarceration; (2) pretrial anxiety; and, (3) impairment of the defense.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Inordinate delay, wholly aside from possible prejudice to a defense on the merits, may `seriously interfere with the defendant's liberty, whether he is free on bail or not, and ... may disrupt his employment, drain his financial resources, curtail his associations, subject him to public obloquy, and create anxiety, in him, his family and his friends.' United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307, 320 [, 92 S.Ct. 455, 463 , 30 L.Ed.2d 468 ] (1971). These factors are more serious for some than for others, but they are inevitably present in every case to some extent .. .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “(1) the length of the delay; (2) the reason for the delay; (3) the defendant's assertion of [his] right; and (4) the prejudice to the defendant.”
    3 later decisions 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.