Kirby v. Dutton’s Empirical Analysis
794 F.2d 245 · 1986
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably Samarzia v. Clark County (1989), Greer v. Mitchell (2001)
44 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) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Preiser v. Rodriguez · Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Federal Maritime Commission · Rivera v. United States · Pacemaker Diagnostic Clinic of America, Inc. v. Instromedix, Inc. · Nathaniel Williams v. State of Missouri
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the scope of the writ [does not] reach this second tier of complaints about deficiencies in state post-conviction proceedings,” noting that “the writ is not the proper means”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he writ [of habeas corpus] is not the proper means by which prisoners should challenge errors or deficiencies in state post-conviction proceedings such as [petitioner] claims here because the claims address collateral matters and not the underlying state conviction giving rise to the prisoner’s incarceration.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.”
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.