Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 910 F.2d 1379 - Prihoda v. McCaughtry

Prihoda v. McCaughtry’s Empirical Analysis

910 F.2d 1379 · 1990

Citation profile

155
cited by 155 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
July 2023
most recently cited

86 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 155 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2023 · most notably Ylst v. Nunnemaker (1991), Wilson v. Sellers (2018)

86 federal appellate · 2 district ·

10401990200020102020decided

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. § 1257 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Faretta v. California · Wainwright v. Sykes · Teague v. Lane · Murray v. Carrier · Sandstrom v. Montana

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

  1. “A basis of decision applied infrequently, unexpectedly, or freakishly may be inadequate, for the lack of notice and consistency may show that the state is discriminating against the federal rights asserted.”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “only if the state court actually relied on a state rule sufficient to justify its decision.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “supplies 'cause' only when the Constitution requires the state to assure adequate legal assistance.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.