Mabry v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
167 federal appellate · 33 district · 251 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 609 later decisions (9 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2024 · most notably Bousley v. United States (1998), United States v. Broce (1989)
167 federal appellate · 33 district · 251 state decisions — followed in 40 states
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 · North Carolina v. Alford · United States v. Agurs · Townsend v. Sain · Brady 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 609 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A plea bargain standing alone is without constitutional significance; in itself it is a mere executory agreement which, until embodied in the judgment of a court, does not deprive an accused of liberty or any other constitutionally protected interest. It is the ensuing guilty plea that implicates the Constitution.”
92 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“permitting Santobello to replead was within the range of constitutionally appropriate remedies.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim— (1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Boyd v. Warden · Boyd v. Waymart
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.