Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 456 U.S. 107 - Engle v. Isaac

Engle v. Isaac’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

5,888
cited by 5,888 later decisions
157
cited 157 times by the Supreme Court
43
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

2,196 federal appellate · 276 district · 846 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5,888 later decisions (157 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2025 · most notably Strickland v. Washington (1984), Coleman v. Thompson (1991)

2,196 federal appellate · 276 district · 846 state decisions — followed in 43 states

2.5k019821990200020102020decided

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

reviewedthe decision below (from Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Wainwright v. Sykes · Fay v. Noia

Cited together with Wainwright v. Sykes · Strickland v. Washington · Murray v. Carrier · Rose v. Lundy · United States v. Frady

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 5,888 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “If a defendant perceives a constitutional claim and believes it may find favor in the federal courts, he may not bypass the state courts simply because he thinks they will be unsympathetic to the claim. Even a state court that has previously rejected a constitutional argument may decide, upon reflection, that the contention is valid.”
    108 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “victims of a fundamental miscarriage of justice will meet the cause-and-prejudice standard.”
    77 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “when a procedural default bars state litigation of a constitutional claim, a state prisoner may not obtain federal habeas relief absent a showing of cause and actual prejudice.”
    55 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.