Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 641 F.2d 274 - Williams v. Briscoe

Williams v. Briscoe’s Empirical Analysis

641 F.2d 274 · 1981

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2016 · most notably Board of Pardons v. Allen (1987), 26 Conn. App. 132 - Vincenzo v. Warden (1991)

25 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions

3101981199020002010decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866)

Relies on Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex · Williams v. Briscoe

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

  1. “'a parole shall be ordered only for the best interest of society ... when the Board believes that [the inmate] is able and willing to fulfill the obligations of a law-abiding citizen.' This evaluation alone, which contains both subjective and objective factors, makes totally unwarranted any suggestion that the statute creates a presumption of entitlement to release on parole after the accrual of the minimum time of incarceration.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A parole shall be ordered only for the best interest of society, not as an award of clemency, and upon determination by the board that there is a reasonable probability that the prisoner is able and willing to fulfill the obligations of a law-abiding citizen so that he can be released -without detriment to the community or to himself.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “cannot reasonably be taken to encourage the expectancy of the right to release.”
    2 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.