Bagley v. Harvey’s Empirical Analysis
718 F.2d 921 · 1983
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Doe v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole (2008), Williams v. Wisconsin (2003)
13 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Shapiro v. Thompson · Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex · Meachum v. Fano · Olim v. Wakinekona · Connecticut Board of Pardons v. Dumschat
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]n individual's constitutional right to travel, having been legally extinguished by a valid conviction followed by imprisonment, is not revived by the change in status from prisoner to parolee.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“There can be no doubt that Bagley’s constitutional right to interstate travel was extinguished upon his valid conviction and imprisonment. Since, to date, Bagley has never regained that freedom of travel he lost upon conviction, he may not invoke the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to compel the Government to grant him the desired right.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“There can be no doubt that [defendant’s] right to interstate travel was extinguished upon his valid convictions and imprisonment. . . . Since parole in a foreign state is clearly less punitive than imprisonment in a foreign state, it cannot be deemed unconstitutional.”
1 later decision 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.