Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 948 F.2d 688 - Bloomgren v. Belaski

Bloomgren v. Belaski’s Empirical Analysis

948 F.2d 688 · 1991

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
3
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently April 2016 · most notably United States v. Williams (1995), United States v. Eccleston (2008)

14 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

220199120002010decided

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. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co. · Department of the Treasury v. Federal Labor Relations Authority · Frates v. Weinshienk · Republic of Ghana v. Trefalcon Corp. · Rondon v. Indiana

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

  1. “federal matter which cannot be overridden by a state court provision for concurrent sentencing on a subsequently-obtained state conviction.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'Thus if a federal detainer were lodged against a prisoner about to be released from state custody, any days that the state held him beyond what would otherwise have been his release date, to await the arrival of the federal marshal, would be time served”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he record contain[ed] no clear explanation for Bloomgren's continued state detention other than the existence of the federal arrest warrant.”
    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.