Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 116 F.3d 396 - Binford v. Rhode

Binford v. Rhode’s Empirical Analysis

116 F.3d 396 · 1997

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 2016

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

40199720002010decided

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 Anders v. California · Coleman v. Thompson · Rose v. Lundy · Castille v. Peoples · Tacho v. Martinez

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

  1. “they are not barred from ultimate federal review, but first must be exhausted in state court.”
    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.