Ex Parte Renier’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably Ex Parte Hargett (1991), State Ex Rel. Holmes v. Honorable Court of Appeals for the Third District (1994)
6 federal appellate · 49 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 18 U.S.C. § 1202
Relies on Lewis v. United States · Dickerson v. New Banner Institute, Inc. · Todd v. State · Ex Parte Young · Zillender v. State
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`the kind of control which one person exercises over another, not to confine him within certain limits, but to subject him to the general authority and power of the person claiming such right.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Matter of Sg · Ex Parte Williams“We find sufficient restraints arising from the applicant’s void conviction to exercise habeas corpus relief. Applicant’s previous discharge of his probation is of no moment because “proof of his said conviction or plea of guilty shall be made known to the court should the defendant again be convicted of any criminal offense.” Art. 42.12, sec. 7, V.A.C.C.P. See also Art. 37.07, sec. 3(a), V.A.C.C.P. This outstanding collateral consequence of appellant’s invalid conviction, imposed under the general authority and the power of the State of Texas, is a current and enduring restraint on applicant’s liberty.... The restraint must be removed. It is founded on a void conviction. The relief sought is granted. Applicant is therefore released from every manner of restraint on his personal liberty as a consequence of that conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Ex Parte Davis“Secondly, when the application is made after conviction Article 11.07 is concerned with “confinement.” Upon examination of such an application the judge of the convicting court has a duty to decide whether there are controverted, unresolved facts “material to the legality of the applicant’s confinement." After the record is reviewed here, this Court “shall enter its judgment remanding the petitioner to custody or ordering his release, as the law and facts may justify.” Finally the procedure prescribed “shall be exclusive and any other procedure shall be void and of no force and effect in discharging the prisoner."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Okere
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.