Cain v. Peters’s Empirical Analysis
972 F.2d 748 · 1992
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably 15 Cal. 4th 1 - People v. Marshall (1997), 175 Ill. 2d 294 - People v. Pecoraro (1997)
16 federal appellate · 15 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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Edwards v. Arizona · Sumner v. Mata · Estelle v. Williams
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'Waiver' in criminal law is a fact-specific concept, to which the presumption of correctness in 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254(d) applies.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Grippo v. Kelly · Gomez v. Ahitow“Defendants forfeit self- representation by remaining silent at critical junctures before or during trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“he had nothing to lose [in representing himself] because he was not 'getting adequate representation'”
1 later decision 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.