Asherman v. Meachum’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably State v. Lamme (1990), State v. Joyner (1993)
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 40 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Morrissey v. Brewer · Wolff v. McDonnell · Turner v. Safley · Hewitt v. Helms
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Your refusal to fully participate in this psychiatric evaluation precludes me from obtaining information necessary to determine whether the ... conclusion of the Board of Parole affected you to the point where you no longer are a suitable person for home release status. The absence of the information referred to ... constitutes sufficient ground for determining that you no longer are a suitable person for home release status.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Asherman v. Meachum““(d) The commissioner of correction shall establish such regulations as he deems necessary for the administration of this section and section 18-101 and for the conduct of persons granted the privileges of this section; and he may suspend the privileges of any persons who violate such regulations or whose conduct he believes is unsuitable for the continuation of such privileges.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lubus“for a person on home release status . . . supervision, as a matter of law, continues to be vested in the department of correction, just as it does for any incarcerated inmate,”
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.