Liner v. Phelps’s Empirical Analysis
731 F.2d 1201 · 1984
Citation profile
12 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Alexander v. McCotter (1985), Fransaw v. Lynaugh (1987)
12 federal appellate ·
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. § 46
Relies on Gerstein v. Pugh · Hurtado v. People of the State of California · Alexander v. Louisiana · Beck v. Washington · Brewer v. United States
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“be invoked with respect to the sufficiency of an indictment only when the indictment is so fatally defective that under no circumstances could a valid conviction result from facts provable under the indictment, and that such a determination 'can be made only by looking to the law of the state where the indictment was issued.' Johnson v. Estelle, 704 F.2d 232 , 236 (5th Cir.1983) (emphasis added).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'the sufficiency of a state indictment is not a matter for federal habeas corpus relief unless it can be shown that the indictment is so defective that the convicting court had no jurisdiction.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the sufficiency of the [charging instrument] was squarely presented to the highest court of the state on appeal, and that court held that the trial court had jurisdiction over the case.”
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.