Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 37 NJL 368 - State v. Gray

State v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis

1875

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
February 1984
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently February 1984

11 state decisions

40187518801890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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.

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

  1. “The writ of habeas corpus, in this case, does not bring up the record of the proceedings and judgment below for review; it operates only on the body of the defendant and raises the single question whether he is legally in custody. This court may, as has been done in this case, award a certiorari to produce the record for its inspection, but it has no power to reverse the judgment of the inferior jurisdiction; it can simply declare that by virtue of the sentence, if manifestly illegal, the defendant cannot be longer restrained of his liberty. The court which rendered the judgment cannot vacate it, or render a new judgment after the term at which it was pronounced is ended, or the judgment is executed, and the punishment partly borne. The judgment subsisting, but being illegal and void, it is no warrant for retaining the defendant in custody, and it seems clear that no new judgment can be passed in this court or the court below.”
    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.