Smyth v. Midgett’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably Peyton v. Williams (1965), City of Richmond v. Randall (1975)
11 federal appellate · 46 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 McDorman v. Smyth · Buchanan v. Buchanan · Fitzgerald v. Smyth · Smyth v. Holland · Stonebreaker v. Smyth
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to perform the function of an appeal or writ of error, to review errors, or to modify or revise a judgment of conviction pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction. It can not be used to secure a judicial determination of any question which, even if determined in the prisoner's favor, could not affect the lawfulness of his immediate custody and detention.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A court does not have jurisdiction to determine the validity of a sentence under which the prisoner is not being detained. It follows that where a prisoner is being detained under a valid sentence he is not entitled to credit for time served on a void sentence fully served before the proceeding for writ of habeas corpus is instituted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Habeas corpus is a writ of inquiry granted to determine whether a person is illegally detained.”
1 later decision 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.