Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 633 F.2d 1146 - Hicks v. Wainwright

Hicks v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis

633 F.2d 1146 · 1981

Citation profile

113
cited by 113 later decisions
7
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

60 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 113 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably 1 Cal. 4th 1132 - People v. Howard (1992), United States v. Flynt (1985)

60 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

6501981199020002010decided

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 Wainwright v. Sykes · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Picard v. Connor · Ungar v. Sarafite · United States v. Uptain

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

  1. “[T]he diligence of the defense in interviewing witnesses and procuring their presence, the probability of procuring their testimony within a reasonable time, the specificity with which the defense is able to describe their expected knowledge or testimony, the degree to which such testimony is expected to be favorable to the accused, and the unique or cumulative nature of the testimony.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'When a denial of a continuance forms a basis of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, not only must there have been an abuse of discretion but it must have been so arbitrary and fundamentally unfair that it violates constitutional principles of due process.'”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a myopic insistence upon expeditiousness in the face of a justifiable request for delay can render the right to defend with counsel an empty formality.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.