Irvin v. Dowd’s Empirical Analysis

1959

Citation profile

394

cited by 394 later decisions

cited 26 times by the Supreme Court

states following

February 2003

most recently cited

179 federal appellate · 37 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 394 later decisions (26 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2003 · most notably Wainwright v. Sykes (1977), Fay v. Noia (1963)

179 federal appellate · 37 district · 17 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.

Appellate journey

reviewedLeslie Irvin v. Alfred F. Dowd, Warden (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Brown v. Allen · Darr v. Burford · Whitney v. People of State of California · Royall · Ex Parte Hawk No - on Rule to Show Cause and Return

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

““(b) An application for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted unless it appears that the applicant has exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the State, or that there is either an absence of available State corrective process or the existence of circumstances rendering such process ineffective to protect tire rights of the prisoner. “(c) An applicant shall not be deemed to have exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the State, within the meaning of this section, if he has the right under the law of the State to raise, by any available procedure, the question presented.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
e.g. Prado McGee Jr. v. W.J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent · 394 F. Supp. 94 - Miller v. Missouri
“Upon the State courts, equally with the courts of the Union, rests the obligation to guard, enforce, and protect every ' right granted or secured by the Constitution of the United States and the laws made in pursuance thereof, whenever those rights are involved in any suit or proceeding before them....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
e.g. Peterson v. Lampert · Daye v. Attorney General of New York
“An applicant shall not be deemed to have exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the State, within the meaning of this section, if he has the right under the law of the State to raise, by any available procedure, the question presented.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
e.g. United States of America Ex Rel. Charles Noia, Relator-Appellant v. Edwin M. Fay, as Warden of Greenhaven Prison, State of New York · Doster v. Bannan

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.