Prushinowski v. Samples’s Empirical Analysis
734 F.2d 1016 · 1984
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently January 2014
10 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Finch v. Connor · Dames & Moore v. Regan · Fernandez v. Phillips · Charles Neely v. William Henkel · Plaster 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[s]eldom, however, can a principle of law be carried to absolute extremes without developing fissures. It is unlikely that extradition would be ordered if the facts were established, by assumption for purposes of argument, or by convincing proof, that the prisons of a foreign country regularly opened each day’s proceedings with a hundred lashes applied to the back of each prisoner who did not deny his or her God or conducted routine breakings on the wheel for every prisoner. [ 734 F.2d at 1019 ].”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Habeas corpus is available only to inquire whether the magistrate had jurisdiction, whether the offence charged is within the treaty and, by a somewhat liberal extension, whether there was any evidence warranting the finding that there was reasonable ground to believe the accused guilty.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“constitutional questions of deprivation of rights are addressed only to the acts of the United States Government and not to those of a foreign nation, at least for purposes of determining questions of extraditability. [ 734 F.2d at 1018-19 ],”
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.