Allen v. Perini’s Empirical Analysis
424 F.2d 134 · 1970
Citation profile
56 federal appellate · 5 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably Williams v. Bagley (2004), Gordon v. Duran (1990)
56 federal appellate · 5 district · 4 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.
Relationships
Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Price v. Johnston · State v. Perry · Darr v. Burford · Peyton v. Rowe
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 143 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[T]he failure of the Office of the Attorney General of Ohio to file a timely return does not afford a basis for instanter relief. Despite the delinquency of the State, the District Court was obligated to decide the ease on its merits, [citations omitted] We conclude that in spite of the untimeliness of the State’s return, the District Court would have no power to grant the writ of habeas corpus in the absence of an evidentiary hearing and unless and until the averments of the petition have been proved by competent evidence.” 424 F.2d at 138 .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hart v. Eyman · Montgomery v. State““It would be highly desirable for Ohio prisoners to have all the relief available in the State courts of Ohio that is available by federal habeas corpus. The judges of this Court as well as the United States District Judges of Ohio would prefer that these issues be determined by the States courts, as contemplated in Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 , 83 S.Ct. 745 , 9 L.Ed.2d 770 .” 424 F.2d at 139”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““A court, justice or judge entertaining an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall forthwith award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from, the application that the applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.