Moreno v. Gonzalez’s Empirical Analysis
116 F.3d 409 · 1997
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Coleman v. Thompson · Rose v. Lundy · Dugger v. Adams · Tacho v. Martinez · Johnson v. Lewis
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Federal review of Moreno's claims is barred only if a mandatory rule of state law precludes Moreno from raising his claims at this date [in state court]. If Moreno still may raise these claims in state court, they are not barred from ultimate federal review, but first must be exhausted in state court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Shumway v. Payne
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.