Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 482 F.3d 1277 - Butler v. Compton

Butler v. Compton’s Empirical Analysis

482 F.3d 1265 · 2007

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
states following
February 2023
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably Seegmiller v. Laverkin City (2008), Yasquez Arroyo v. Starks (2009)

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

180200720102020decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Heck v. Humphrey · Simms v. Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services · Muhammad v. Close · 158 F. App'x 108 - Butler v. Compton

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

  1. “In order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a § 1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.”
    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.