Norris v. Risley’s Empirical Analysis
878 F.2d 1178 · 1989
Citation profile
303 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 337 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably Thomas v. Brewer (1991), Harris v. Vasquez (1990)
303 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
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 Townsend v. Sain · Irvin v. Dowd · Illinois v. Allen · Pullman-Standard v. Swint · Vandygriff v. Phillips
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 337 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A habeas corpus petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if he has alleged facts which, if proven, would entitle him to relief and he did not receive a full and fair evidentiary hearing in a state court.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To the extent it is necessary to review findings of fact, the clearly erroneous standard applies.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Well, I’m compelled to deny your motion, because the public is entitled to attend court proceedings up to the point where the Court is absolutely satisfied that there is some imminent threat involved. And certainly the Rape Task Force ladies and personnel are not known for imminent threat to anybody’s life. Well, we do have First Amendment rights that are involved. And I don’t feel that I can grant that. As long as it is an expression that is announced peacefully — And certainly a button would do that — I think I have no basis for granting the motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Norris v. Risley
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.