Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 368 U.S. 487 - MacHibroda v. United States

MacHibroda v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

3,638
cited by 3,638 later decisions
62
cited 62 times by the Supreme Court
42
states following
June 2026
most recently cited

1,808 federal appellate · 250 district · 756 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3,638 later decisions (62 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Boykin v. Alabama (1969), North Carolina v. Alford (1970)

1,808 federal appellate · 250 district · 756 state decisions — followed in 42 states

1.2k01962197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedMachibroda v. United States (from Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Hill v. United States · United States v. Hayman · Kercheval v. United States · Walker v. Johnston

Cited together with Sanders v. United States · Townsend v. Sain · Hill v. United States · Kercheval v. United States · McCarthy 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 3,638 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “vague, conclusory, or palpably incredible,”
    124 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[ujnless the motion and the files and the records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall * * * grant a prompt hearing thereon, determine the issues and make findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect thereto.”
    26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. ““Failure to follow the formal requirements of Rule 32(a) is not of itself an error that can be raised by collateral attack under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 although aggravating circumstances may indicate the denial of a right surpassing formal error. -x- *■ *»”
    4 later decisions 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.