Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 146 U.S. 271 - In re Cross

In re Cross’s Empirical Analysis

146 U.S. 271 · 1892

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
July 1994
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1994 · most notably Rogers v. Peck (1905), Givens v. Zerbst (1921)

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 state decisions

9018921900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Ex parte Lange · Bain Jr · Ex parte Virginia · In re Ayers · Roberts v. Reilly

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

  1. “One of the matters claimed by Petitioner is `that officially he was electrocuted before sunrise on the 24th of May, 1957, by the Warden of Huntsville Penitentiary.' The claim is a fiction. Petitioner was not in fact electrocuted. Petitioner was then prosecuting his petition to the Supreme Court of the United States for writ of certiorari and on May 21, 1957, the Honorable Hugo L. Black, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, ordered that the execution and enforcement of the sentence of death imposed upon the Petitioner by the District Court of Wharton County of the State of Texas be stayed, pending disposition of the petition for writ of certiorari "After fully considering the matter, I believe such petition to be without merit, and decline either to grant the Writ of Habeas Corpus or enter an Order to Show Cause.”
    1 later decision 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.