Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 F.3d 742 - Hall v. Washington

Hall v. Washington’s Empirical Analysis

106 F.3d 742 · 1997

Citation profile

200
cited by 200 later decisions
6
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

90 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 200 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably Tuan Van Tran v. Gary Lindsey Salinas Valley State Prisons (2000), Matteo v. Superintendent (1999)

90 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 state decisions

9701997200020102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Faretta v. California · Ornelas v. United States · Darden v. Wainwright · Eddings v. Oklahoma

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

  1. “The statutory “unreasonableness” standard allows the state court’s conclusion to stand if it is one of several equally plausible outcomes. On the other hand, Congress would not have used the word “unreasonable” if it really meant that federal courts were to defer in all cases to the state court’s decision. Some decisions will be at such tension with governing U.S. Supreme Court precedents, or so inadequately supported by the record, or so arbitrary, that a writ must issue.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “applied clearly established federal law as the Supreme Court has determined it. Id.”
    6 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.