Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 597 FSUPP 1388 - Toussaint v. McCarthy

Toussaint v. McCarthy’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
1
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 11 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably Toussaint v. McCarthy (1986), 23 Cal. 4th 225 - People v. Ayala (2000)

21 federal appellate · 11 district · 3 state decisions

23019841990200020102020decided

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 Estelle v. Gamble · Morrissey v. Brewer · Wolff v. McDonnell · Bell v. Wolfish · Gregg v. Georgia

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

  1. “alliances and enmities among inmates shift constantly.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Lockup units at San Quentin and Folsom are counted among the most violence-racked correctional facilities in the United States. In part, this is due to the California Department of Corrections policy of concentrating the most violence-prone offenders in these two institutions. In part, it is caused by the horrendous physical conditions, including double-cell-ing. In part, it is due to the crowding of both facilities beyond design capacity. In part, it may be due to the fact that lockup units have no programs. But in large measure, it originates in the violent propensities of segregated inmates themselves.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Penal Code section 2933 provides that a state prison inmate may receive six months of worktime credit for every six months of full-time performance in a credit qualifying work, training or education program established by the Director of Corrections. Prisoners willing to participate in a full-time credit qualifying assignment, but who either are not assigned to such a program, or are assigned for less than full time, are to earn credits under the formula provided for by Penal Code section 2931, which is a four-month combined work and good behavior credit for each eight months served.”
    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.