280 F. Supp. 480 - Martin v. Roach’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Duncombe v. State of New York · 259 F. Supp. 222 - Lombardi v. Peace · Greene v. State of New York
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“for alleged civil rights violations incurred in state criminal proceedings, thereby skirting the requirements of the federal habeas corpus statutes, is improper.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rodgers v. Westbrook
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.