Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 456 U.S. 152 - United States v. Frady

United States v. Frady’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

8,274
cited by 8,274 later decisions
69
cited 69 times by the Supreme Court
37
states following
July 2025
most recently cited

3,359 federal appellate · 828 district · 975 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8,274 later decisions (69 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably Strickland v. Washington (1984), United States v. Olano (1993)

3,359 federal appellate · 828 district · 975 state decisions — followed in 37 states

3.4k019821990200020102020decided

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

reviewedUnited States v. Frady (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1254 · 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 Wainwright v. Sykes · Fay v. Noia · Stone v. Powell · Rose v. Lundy

Cited together with Strickland v. Washington · Wainwright v. Sykes · United States v. Young · Murray v. Carrier · Engle v. Isaac

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 8,274 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[p]lain errors or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they were not brought to the attention of the court.”
    188 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[This] plain-error exception to the contemporaneous-objection rule is to be `used sparingly, solely in those circumstances in which a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result.'”
    127 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “not merely that the errors at his trial created a possibility of prejudice, but that they worked to his actual and substantial disadvantage, infecting his entire trial with error of constitutional dimensions.”
    73 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.