Fierro v. Gomez’s Empirical Analysis
77 F.3d 301 · 1996
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018 · most notably Lonchar v. Thomas (1996), 14 Cal. 4th 1005 - People v. Bradford (1997)
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Bell v. Wolfish · Heck v. Humphrey · Monroe v. Pape · Gregg v. Georgia · Preiser v. Rodriguez
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“execution by lethal gas under the California protocol is unconstitutionally cruel and unusual and violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Booker v. Murphy · 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5304, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7455 David Fierro Alejandro Gilbert Ruiz and Robert Alton Harris, as Individuals and on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. C.A. Terhune, as an Individual and in His Capacity as Director, California Department of Corrections and Arthur Calderon, as an Individual, and in His Capacity as Warden of San Quentin Prison“Fierro II "). In Fierro II, the district court concluded that "California Penal Code § 3604, to the extent that it requires or permits the imposition of death by administration of lethal gas, violates the eighth and fourteenth amendments of the United States Constitution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5304, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7455 David Fierro Alejandro Gilbert Ruiz and Robert Alton Harris, as Individuals and on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. C.A. Terhune, as an Individual and in His Capacity as Director, California Department of Corrections and Arthur Calderon, as an Individual, and in His Capacity as Warden of San Quentin Prison · Fiero v. C.a. Terhune“hanging according to the protocol does not involve lingering death, mutilation, or the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain.”
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.