Wallace v. Duckworth’s Empirical Analysis
778 F.2d 1215 · 1985
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably United States ex rel. Barnard v. Lane (1987), Cruz v. Warden of Dwight Correctional Center (1990)
34 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Stone v. Powell · Picard v. Connor · Anderson v. Harless · WILWORDING Et Al. v. SWENSON, WARDEN · Rogers 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“by either (a) providing the highest court in the state a fair opportunity to consider the constitutional issue, or (b) having no further available means for pursuing a review of one's conviction in state court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Section 1. Remedy-To Whom Available-Conditions. (a) any person who has been convicted of, or sentenced for, a crime by a court of this state, and who claims: # # * * * * (5) that his sentence has expired, his probation, parole or conditional release unlawfully revoked, or he is otherwise un lawfully held in custody or other restraint; # * * * * * may institute at any time a proceeding under this Rule to secure relief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Harper v. Gibson“prong of the cause-and-prejudice standard. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is VACATED and this cause is REMANDED with instructions to dismiss the petition with prejudice. * After preliminary examination of the briefs, the court notified the parties that it had tentatively concluded that oral argument would not be helpful to the court in this case. The notice provided that any party might file a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.