Piggie v. McBride’s Empirical Analysis
277 F.3d 922 · 2002
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Piggie v. Cotton (2003), Piggie v. Cotton (2003)
8 federal appellate · 3 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 Wolff v. McDonnell · Ponte v. Real · Whitford v. Boglino · Jimmy Walker v. J.T. O'brien, and Joseph W. Finfrock v. Craig A. Hanks · Chavis v. Rowe
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Indiana prisoners possess a liberty interest in good-time credits, and Indiana therefore must afford due process before reducing a prisoner’s credit-earning class. The Supreme Court has held that procedural due process requires, among other safeguards, that a prisoner facing disciplinary proceedings should be allowed to call witnesses and present documentary evidence when permitting him to do so will not be unduly hazardous to institutional safety or correctional goals. Wolff [v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 566 , 94 S.Ct. 2963 , 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974)] does not, however, guarantee prisoners the unfettered right to call any witness or present any evidence they wish regardless of its relevance or necessity. But the CAB may not arbitrarily refuse to consider exculpatory evidence simply because other evidence in the record suggests guilt. And prisoners are entitled to have exculpatory evidence disclosed unless its disclosure would unduly threaten institutional concerns.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Phelps v. Tucker
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.