Pagan v. Keane’s Empirical Analysis
984 F.2d 61 · 1993
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Jones v. Vacco (1997), Kelley v. Secretary for the Department of Corrections (2004)
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 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
Relies on Coleman v. Thompson · Townsend v. Sain · Arizona v. Fulminante · Mincey v. Arizona · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[TJoumsend also made clear that a District Court retained the power to hold a hearing even though one was not required---This aspect of Townsend remains the law .... “the district courts still possess the discretion, which has not been removed by ... [Tamayo-Reyes] to hold hearings even where they are not mandatory.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The purpose of the test is to indicate the situations in which the holding of an evi-dentiary hearing is mandatory. In all other cases where the material facts are in dispute, the holding of such a hearing is in the discretion of the district judge. If he concludes that the habeas applicant was afforded a full and fair hearing by the state court resulting in reliable findings, he may, and ordinarily should, accept the facts as found in the hearing.”
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.