Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 44 F.3d 169 - Soto v. Walker

Soto v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

44 F.3d 169 · 1995

Citation profile

86
cited by 86 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
October 2024
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 86 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2024 · most notably Sandin v. Conner (1995), Tellier v. Fields (2000)

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

3701995200020102020decided

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 Wolff v. McDonnell · Hewitt v. Helms · Davis v. Scherer · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · Wrenn v. Board of Directors

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

  1. “[a]n inmate must merely receive some notice of the charges against him and an opportunity to present his views to the prison official charged with deciding whether to transfer him to administrative segregation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The requirement that a prisoner receive, in connection with an initial transfer to administrative segregation, at least some notice and opportunity to be heard is distinct from and in addition to the requirement that a prisoner receive, in connection with the adjudication of misconduct charges that might result in punitive/disciplinaiy confinement, the much more extensive procedural protections that are set forth in Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-72 [, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 2978-82 , 41 L.Ed.2d 935 ] (1974), and which approximate a formal adversarial hearing. See Hewitt, 459 U.S. at 466-77 [, 103 S.Ct. at 868-74 ]; Matiyn v. Henderson, 841 F.2d 31, 34 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1220 [, 108 S.Ct. 2876 , 101 L.Ed.2d 911 ] (1988); Bolden v. Alston, 810 F.2d 353, 357 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 896 [, 108 S.Ct. 229 , 98 L.Ed.2d 188 ] (1987).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “state prisoners have a liberty interest in remaining free from administrative confinement where prison regulations 'specify certain conditions that must be met to permit a prisoner's placement' in such confinement.”
    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.