Brown v. Parratt’s Empirical Analysis
560 F.2d 303 · 1977
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently April 1994
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · North Carolina v. Alford · Brady v. United States · Gregg v. Georgia · Santobello v. New York
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Opportunities for discretionary action are inherent in the prosecution of criminal cases. The district court noted that 'Other recidivist offenders may have legitimately avoided enhanced penalties by the decision of state authorities to afford mercy or by plea bargaining, both of which are unquestionably constitutional forms of prosecutorial discretion.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pierce v. Parratt“the conscious exercise of some selectivity in enforcement (of habitual criminal statutes) is not in itself a federal constitutional violation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Pierce v. Parratt
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.