Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 515 U.S. 39 - Garlotte v. Fordice

Garlotte v. Fordice’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

325
cited by 325 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
May 2024
most recently cited

108 federal appellate · 7 district · 85 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 325 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2024 · most notably Rumsfeld Secretary of Defense v. Padilla et al. (2004), Ajadi v. Commissioner of Correction (2006)

108 federal appellate · 7 district · 85 state decisions

16701995200020102020decided

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

reviewedGarlotte v. Fordice (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. · Peyton v. Rowe · Maleng v. Cook · McNally v. Hill · Carolco Television Inc. v. National Broadcasting Co.

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

  1. “a prisoner serving consecutive sentences is 'in custody' under any one of them”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “remains 'in custody' under all of his sentences until all are served,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Like the habeas petitioner in Peyton , petitioner Harvey Garlotte is incarcerated under consecutive sentences. Unlike the Peyton petitioners, however, Garlotte does not challenge a conviction underlying a sentence yet to be served. Instead, Gar-lotte seeks to attack a conviction underlying the sentence that ran first in a consecutive series, a sentence already served, but one that nonetheless persists to postpone Garlotte’s eligibility for parole. Following Peyton , we do not disaggregate Garlotte’s sentences, but comprehend them as composing a continuous stream.”
    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.