144 F. Supp. 2d 817 - Johnson v. Freeburn’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Heck v. Humphrey · Thomas v. Arn · Turner v. Safley · Preiser v. Rodriguez
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“defendants in criminal cases are cloaked with substantial procedural protections — including a prohibition on the use of hearsay statements by confidential informants — most of which are not applicable in a prison disciplinary proceeding”); see generally Matosantos Commercial Corp. v. Applebees Int'l., Inc., 245 F.3d 1203 , 1212 (10th Cir.2001) (noting that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gwinn v. Awmiller
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.