Johnson v. Gill’s Empirical Analysis
883 F.3d 756 · 2018
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3585 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 566
Relies on United States v. Wilson · United States v. Mauro · Ponzi v. Fessenden · Reno v. Koray · Robertson v. Railroad Labor Board
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Bureau of Prisons will consider a request ... that an inmate be transferred to the physical custody of state ... agents pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kaipio“must be permitted to exhaust its remedy ... before the other [sovereign] shall attempt to take [the defendant] for its purpose,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kaipio“Thomas v. Brewer , 923 F.2d 1361 , 1365 (9th Cir. 1991), and”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kaipio
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.