Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 310 FAPPX 807 - Condon v. Wolfe

Condon v. Wolfe’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
October 2023
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Williams v. Taylor · Wainwright v. Sykes · Kyles v. Whitley · Estelle v. McGuire

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

  1. “[o]ne to whose conduct a statute clearly applies may not successfully challenge it for vagueness.” Id. at 495 n. 7, 102 S.Ct. 1186 (internal quotation marks omitted). In other words, one “who engages in some conduct that is clearly proscribed cannot complain of the vagueness of the law as applied to the conduct of others.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.