Stone v. Powell’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
2,566 federal appellate · 455 district · 1,065 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7,037 later decisions (292 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2025 · most notably Jackson v. Virginia (1979), Illinois v. Gates (1983)
2,566 federal appellate · 455 district · 1,065 state decisions — followed in 49 states
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
reviewedLloyd Charles Powell v. W. T. Stone, Warden (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Chapman v. State of California · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Wong Sun v. United States · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics
Cited together with Wainwright v. Sykes · Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · United States v. Calandra · Townsend v. Sain
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 7,037 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“where the State has provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of a Fourth Amendment claim, a state prisoner may not be granted federal habeas corpus relief on the ground that evidence obtained in an unconstitutional search or seizure was introduced at his trial.”
206 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“where the State has provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of a Fourth Amendment claim, the Constitution does not require that a state prisoner be granted federal habeas corpus relief on the ground that evidence obtained in an unconstitutional search or seizure was introduced at his trial.”
49 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“an opportunity for full and fair litigation”
33 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.