Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 691 F.2d 730 - Marks v. Estelle

Marks v. Estelle’s Empirical Analysis

691 F.2d 730 · 1982

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
1
states following
December 2000
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 2000 · most notably Nichols v. Scott (1995), McGee v. Wj Estelle (1984)

18 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

250198219902000decided

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 Gideon v. Wainwright · Wainwright v. Sykes · Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Engle v. Isaac · Argersinger v. Hamlin

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

  1. “'[t]his assertion ... would effectively eliminate any requirement of showing cause at all. If a petitioner could not demonstrate any legitimate cause, he would only have to raise the spectre of ineffective assistance of counsel to get his challenge heard. This we refuse to sanction.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A [habeas corpus] petition may be dismissed if it appears that the state of which the respondent is an officer has been prejudiced in its ability to respond to the petition by delay in its filing unless the petitioner shows that it is based on grounds of which he could not have had knowledge by the exercise of reasonable diligence before the circumstances prejudicial to the state occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he state's Rule 9(a) motion is meritorious only if it suffered some prejudice after the lapse of a reasonable amount of time for Marks to learn of [the Argersinger] decision and act.”
    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.