Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 F.3d 181 - In Re Walter Hill

In Re Walter Hill’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
March 2022
most recently cited

1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 2022

1 district ·

301990200020102020decided

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 Teague v. Lane · Cage v. Louisiana · McKinney v. Baldwin · Hill v. Jones · Nutter v. White

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. “a new rule of constitutional law has been 'made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court' within the meaning of § 2255 only when the Supreme Court declares the collateral availability of the rule in question, either by explicitly so stating or by applying the rule in a collateral proceeding”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the liberal amendment policy applicable to habeas petitions may make [new] claims ... 'available' to the petitioner during a prior habeas action, even when the claim would not have been available at the inception of that prior action”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense”
    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.