Hays v. Arave’s Empirical Analysis
977 F.2d 475 · 1992
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably United States v. Stevens (2000), Hegler v. Borg (1995)
26 federal appellate · 4 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 Chapman v. State of California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Arizona v. Fulminante · Illinois v. Allen
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“because the right to be present at one's sentencing proceeding is a 'fundamental' one that 'transcends the criminal process[,]' ... a sentence that results from such a proceeding 'def[ies] analysis by”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“reason why unconstitutional in absentia sentencing constitutes `structural error' [under Fulminante ] is our inability to determine accurately the impact of the error on the outcome of the proceeding”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Luu v. People · Rice v. Wood Rice“affect[ ] each and every aspect of that crucial phase of his criminal adjudication.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.