Vitello v. Gaughan’s Empirical Analysis
544 F.2d 17 · 1976
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Stone v. Powell · Hill v. United States · Davis v. United States · Wiener v. California · Brooks v. Tennessee
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he appropriate inquiry is whether the claimed error of law is ‘a fundamental defect which inherently results in a complete miscarriage of justice,’ and whether ‘it present[s] exceptional circumstances where the need for the remedy afforded by the writ of habeas corpus is apparent.’”
1 later decision 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.