Nettles v. Grounds’s Empirical Analysis
830 F.3d 922 · 2016
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3621 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (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 Strickland v. Washington · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Wolff v. McDonnell · Heck v. Humphrey · Fuentes v. Shevin
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a petitioner's challenge to his custody is that ... he is unlawfully confined in the wrong institution, ... his grievance is that he is being unlawfully subjected to physical restraint, and in each case habeas corpus has been accepted as the specific instrument to obtain release from such confinement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“habeas is available only for actions in the 'core of habeas' " and challenges by state prisoners that do not contest "the fact or duration of the conviction or sentence”
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.