Plunkett v. Estelle’s Empirical Analysis
709 F.2d 1004 · 1983
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently September 2012 · most notably Fransaw v. Lynaugh (1987), Ricalday v. Procunier (1984)
9 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 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 · Sandstrom v. Montana · Cupp v. Naughten · Sumner v. Mata · Marshall v. Lonberger
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[n]o principle of procedural due process is more clearly established than that notice of the specific charge ... [is] among the constitutional rights of every accused in a criminal proceeding in all courts, state or federal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is undesirable, erroneous, or even 'universally condemned.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“aware he might be convicted not of intentionally killing the child, but of intending to injure her by a blow that caused her death”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fransaw v. Lynaugh
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.