Ex Parte Paprskar’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently August 2009 · most notably Garcia v. Dial (1980), Galitz v. State (1981)
2 federal appellate · 25 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 Preiser v. Rodriguez · Carafas v. J · Jones v. Cunningham · Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky · Peyton v. Rowe
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It would not be appropriate to reclassify this proceeding as a criminal case simply because this might be an appropriate forum to handle the matter complained of. On the issue of whether or not this case is a criminal case it should be noted that the petitioner has not been placed in jeopardy in a matter from which he can appeal. There are no criminal penalties attached to the order of the court or involved in this expunction act, except for violation of any court order entered. The action in question is not brought by or in the name of the State and the persons against whom the action was brought are not charged with having committed a crime or violated any penal statute. Cf. Hogan v. Turland, Tex., 428 S.W.2d 316 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A person who has been arrested is entitled to have a11 records and files relating to the arrest expunged if: (1) an indictment or information has not been presented against him for an offense arising out of the transaction for which he was arrested; (2) he has been released and the charge, if any, has been dismissed; and (3) he has not been convicted of a felony in the five years preceding the date of the arrest, (emphasis added)”
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.