Black v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
269 F.2d 38 · 1959
Citation profile
97 federal appellate · 10 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 161 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2009 · most notably Hill v. United States (1962), Opinions of the Justices to the House of Representatives (1979)
97 federal appellate · 10 district · 19 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. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 5
Relies on Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann · Mallory v. United States · United States v. Hayman · Jencks v. United States · Durham v. United States
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 161 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Appellant argues that he was not competently represented by counsel during the trial. This is not a ground for relief under section 2255 unless it is shown that the attorney’s conduct was so incompetent that it made the trial a farce, requiring the court to intervene in behalf of the client.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'disposition of the appeal may render the [2255 motion] unnecessary'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The Eight Amendment was adopted to prevent inhuman, barbarous, or torturous punishment. It is possible for the length of a sentence to be so disproportionate to the offense as to fall within the inhibition. Hemans v. United States, 6 Cir., 163 F.2d 228, 237 . Ordinarily, however, where the sentence imposed is within the limits prescribed by the statute for the offense committed, it will not be regarded as cruel and unusual. Edwards v. United States, 10 Cir., 206 F.2d 855 . In our view tbe appregate sentence imposed on Black is not so disproportionate to the offense committed as to offend the Eighth Amendment ban.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Karathanos
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.