Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 SO3D 460 - Acra v. State

Acra v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Teague v. Lane · Saffle v. Parks · Whorton v. Bockting · 471 So. 2d 1257 - Ex Parte Boatwright

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

  1. ““Using this framework, we first. ask whether the rule announced in an opinion is a new rule or whether it is an old rule. ‘[A]n old rule applies both on direct and collateral review, but a new rule is generally applicable only to cases that are still on direct review.’ Id. (emphasis added). A new rule, however, may apply to .cases on collateral review if ‘the rule[ ] come[s] within ... the ... exceptions to the general principle that new rules will not be applied on collateral review.’ Saffle v. Parks, 494 U.S. 484, 494 , 110 S.Ct. 1257 , 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The competing arguments over the retroactivity of Miller essentially narrow the inquiry to whether the decision merely established a new penalty-phase procedure for courts to follow before imposing a life sentence without parole for crimes committed by juveniles or whether the decision established either a substantive rule of law or one that implicates fundamental fairness and accuracy of the criminal proceeding.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ ‘[a] new rule applies retroactively in a collateral proceeding only if (1) the rule is substantive or (2) the rule is a “‘watershed rul[e] of criminal procedure’ implicating the fundamental fairness and accuracy of the criminal proceeding.”’ Whorton, 549 U.S. at 416 (quoting Saffle, 494 U.S. at 495 , quoting in turn Teague, 489 U.S. at 311 ).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.