United States v. Rapert’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

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

1. “[Admitting to probation violations at a revocation hearing is not the equivalent of pleading guilty to a crime. The admissions are ‘not made in the course of a criminal trial and do not give rise to a different statutory offense or to an increase in punishment on the underlying conviction.’ ... [T]he theoretical justifications for the due process safeguards assured in Boykin v. Alabama [ 395 U.S. 238 , 89 S.Ct. 1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 ] do not manifest themselves at the probation revocation hearing. The probationer has at best no right to a jury trial, an attenuated confrontation right, and a limited self-incrimination privilege^] (citations omitted).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Janis

2. “no right to jury trial, an attenuated confrontation right, and a limited self-incrimination privilege,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Pelensky