Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 464 U.S. 46 - Maggio v. Williams

Maggio v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

121
cited by 121 later decisions
14
cited 14 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
November 2005
most recently cited

59 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 121 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2005 · most notably Caldwell v. Mississippi (1985), Sawyer v. Smith (1990)

59 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

610198319902000decided

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

reviewedWilliams v. Maggio (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Gregg v. Georgia · Fay v. Noia · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Rose v. Lundy

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

  1. “there is no hint that the court [of appeals] found that 'four Members of this Court would consider the underlying issue sufficiently meritorious for the grant of certiorari' or that 'a significant possibility of reversal existed,'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the California Supreme Court in Pulley had wholly failed to compare applicant's case with other cases to determine whether his death sentence was disproportionate to the punishment imposed on others.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[o]ur prior actions are ample evidence that we do not believe that the challenge to district-wide, rather than state-wide, proportionality review is an issue warranting a grant of certiorari.”
    2 later decisions 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.