Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 429 U.S. 78 - Moody v. Daggett

Moody v. Daggett’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

1,978
cited by 1,978 later decisions
22
cited 22 times by the Supreme Court
39
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

571 federal appellate · 244 district · 396 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,978 later decisions (22 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Hewitt v. Helms (1983), Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex (1979)

571 federal appellate · 244 district · 396 state decisions — followed in 39 states

4620197619801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedSmall v. Britton (from Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Barker v. Wingo · Morrissey v. Brewer · Wolff v. McDonnell · United States v. Marion

Cited together with Morrissey v. Brewer · Meachum v. Fano · Wolff v. McDonnell · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · Montanye v. Haymes

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 1,978 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “no legitimate statutory or constitutional entitlement sufficient to invoke due process”
    36 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “execution of the warrant and custody under that warrant”
    30 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A detainer in this (federal-federal) context is an internal administrative mechanism to assure that an inmate subject to an unexpired term of confinement will not be released from custody until the jurisdiction asserting parole violation has had an opportunity to act . . . . When two autonomous jurisdictions are involved, as for example when a federal detainer is placed against an inmate of a state institution, a detainer is a matter of comity.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.