Alburquerque v. Bara’s Empirical Analysis
628 F.2d 767 · 1980
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably Klein v. Harris (1981), Thomas Garcia v. Hazel Lewis Hale Creek Correctional Facility (1999)
14 federal appellate · 3 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 Wainwright v. Sykes · Fay v. Noia · Taylor v. Louisiana · Duren v. Missouri · County Court of Ulster Cty. v. Allen
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“it suffices for present purposes to observe that no reasoned, factually substantiated opinion has been rendered by the state courts holding that Alburquerque did not meet the procedural requirements for challenging the method of composing his jury panel”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Forman v. Smith · Taylor v. Harris“Wainwright cannot be interpreted to grant states a blanket license to set up vague or unreasonable procedural obstacles to the assertion of a federal right.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Spencer v. Zant
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.