Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 388 F.2d 21 - United States of America Ex Rel. Albert Ackerman v. Harry E. Russell, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania

United States of America Ex Rel. Albert Ackerman v. Harry E. Russell, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania’s Empirical Analysis

388 F.2d 21 · 1968

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
March 1985
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently March 1985

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

110196819701980decided

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.

Relationships

Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · Townsend v. Sain · Carnley v. Cochran · Von Moltke v. Gillies

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

  1. “Even where the procedure employed [by the state court] does not violate the Constitution, if it appears to be seriously inadequate for the ascertainment of the truth, it is the federal judge’s duty to disregard the state findings and take evidence anew. Supra, at p. 316, 83 S.Ct. at p. 759 .”
    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.