Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2001 WIAPP 39 - State v. Nonahal

State v. Nonahal’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
November 2009
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on United States v. Mauro · Cuyler v. Adams · New York v. Hill · United States v. Ford · United States v. Williams

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

  1. “A detainer is a 'notification filed with the institution in which a prisoner is serving a sentence, advising that he is wanted to face pending criminal charges in another jurisdiction.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a procedure inconsistent with the statute's provisions”
    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.