Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 895 F.2d 378 - Wilson v. O'Leary

Wilson v. O'Leary’s Empirical Analysis

895 F.2d 378 · 1990

Citation profile

138
cited by 138 later decisions
2
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

97 federal appellate · 1 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 138 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably United States v. Dunkel (1991), United States v. Leichtnam (1991)

97 federal appellate · 1 district · 9 state decisions

1170199020002010decided

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. § 2253 (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. § 636

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Wainwright v. Sykes · Rhode Island v. Innis · United States v. Cronic · Oregon v. Elstad

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 138 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “All arguments for reversal must appear in the opening brief, so that the appellee may address them.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A reply brief shall be limited to matter in reply.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Astoundingly, the state did not mention harmless error in its opening brief ... Procedural rules apply to the government as well as to defendants. [The state] has forfeited what would have been its best argument. If as a result a violent offender goes free, the Attorney General ... must understand where the responsibility lies--with his own staff.”
    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.