Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 981 F.2d 1032 - Connor v. Estelle

Connor v. Estelle’s Empirical Analysis

981 F.2d 1032 · 1992

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
June 2011
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently June 2011

11 federal appellate · 1 district ·

130199220002010decided

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)

Relies on Weaver v. Graham · Cummings v. The State of Missouri · 39 Cal. 3d 464 - In Re Jackson · 33 Cal. 3d 176 - In Re Stanworth · Smith v. United States Parole Commission

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

  1. “[T]he application of the DSL parole-suitability guidelines to prisoners sentenced under the ISL does not disadvantage them, and therefore does not violate the federal constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “policy of California that prisoners 'should' be accorded an annual parole suitability review, except that in 'extreme cases' the review could be every two or three years.”
    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.