Mounce v. Knighten’s Empirical Analysis
503 F.2d 967 · 1974
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1990
3 federal appellate ·
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. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2242 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky · Wales v. Whitney · West v. Louisiana · Sanders v. Bennett · Jones v. Biddle
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 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“28 U.S.C. § 2242 requires that the application for the Great Writ “shall allege ... the name of the person who has custody over [the applicant] ...;” and 28 U.S.C. § 2243 provides that the writ or order to show cause why the writ should not be granted “shall be directed to the person having custody of the person detained.” In Wales v. Whitney, 1885, 114 U.S. 564, 574 , 5 S.Ct. 1050, 1055 , 29 L.Ed. 277, 280 , the Supreme Court noted that the Congressional legislation relating to the writ contemplate [sic] a proceeding against some person who has the immediate custody of the party detained with the power to produce the body of such party before the court or judge, that he may be liberated if no sufficient reason is shown to the contrary. Thus, the respondent “must be the petitioner’s immediate custodian [and] ... must have the power to produce the body of the petitioner before the court and, ultimately, to discharge him from custody.” [Citation omitted].”
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.