Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 786 F.2d 536 - Matusiak v. Kelly

Matusiak v. Kelly’s Empirical Analysis

786 F.2d 536 · 1986

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
1
states following
June 2010
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently June 2010 · most notably Lambert v. Blodgett (2004), Reilly v. United States (1988)

19 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

2001986199020002010decided

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 Boykin v. Alabama · Johnson v. Zerbst · Picard v. Connor · Dusky v. United States · Miller v. Fenton

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.

  1. “affirmative showing that [the plea] was intelligent and voluntary.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"In any proceeding instituted in a Federal Court by an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgement of a State court, a determination after a hearing on the merits of a factual issue, made by a State court of competent jurisdiction ... shall be presumed to be correct, unless ... "(8) ... the Federal court ... concludes that such factual determination is not supported by the record as a whole.””
    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.