Contreras v. Schiltgen’s Empirical Analysis
122 F.3d 30 · 1997
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently July 2015 · most notably Drakes v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (2003), Contreras v. Schiltgen (1998)
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (§ 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Heck v. Humphrey · Lindh v. Murphy · Carafas v. J · Jones v. Cunningham · Custis v. United States
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because Contreras' petition was filed prior to April 24, 1996, this appeal is unaffected by the [AEDPA].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“may not collaterally attack his state court conviction in a habeas proceeding against the INS”
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.