Spencer v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis
403 F.2d 778 · 1968
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently November 1983 · most notably Rubin F. Needel v. Palmer C. Scafati, Superintendent (1969), Williams v. Wainwright (1969)
31 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Texas v. Payton · Peters v. Rutledge · Williams v. Dutton · Wainwright v. Simpson · Phelper v. Decker
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Chief Judge Brown has aptly noted: In the interest of comity we must as to all of the issues now asserted, put the fact finding and law finding responsibility squarely on * * * [state] Courts where, initially at least, it belongs. * * * The remedy prescribed and open-mindedly administered by the [state] Courts will afford * * * [applicant] an opportunity to present his contentions adequately and fully develop them in evidentiary hearings as required.” (Emphasis added.) Spencer v. Wain wright, 403 F.2d 778, 781 (5th Cir. 1968); See Brent v. White, 398 F.2d 503, n. 10 (5th Cir. 1968). Cf. Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 , 83 S.Ct. 745 , 9 L.Ed.2d 770 (1962); Cline v. Beto, 418 F.2d 549 (5th Cir. 1969).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“can [then] return to the Federal Court for its inescapably independent judgment on federal issues.”
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.