Franklin v. Shields’s Empirical Analysis
569 F.2d 784 · 1977
Citation profile
52 federal appellate · 6 district · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 122 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2023 · most notably Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex (1979), Lee v. Board of Education (1980)
52 federal appellate · 6 district · 17 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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
Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Wolff v. McDonnell · Goldberg v. Kelly · Gagnon v. Scarpelli
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the only explicit constitutional requisite is that the Board furnish to the prisoner a statement of its reasons for denial of parole”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“those minimum procedures appropriate under the circumstances and required by the Due Process Clause to insure that the state-created right is not arbitrarily abrogated.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In many instances, by furnishing the reasons for parole denial, the Board can instruct the prisoner about the changes that are expected of him if he is to meet the criteria for release. As the record reveals, however, there are some prisoners who are not considered fit for parole because of such a factor as a long history of recidivism. These prisoners are not in a position to remedy their deficiencies even if the Board states its reasons in writing. Nevertheless, a statement of reasons is important, for it will show that the Board has not acted arbitrarily.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dace v. Mickelson
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.