Wood v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
130 F.3d 373 · 1997
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably Bennett v. Mueller (2003), Kathleen Braun v. Barbara Powell (2000)
21 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Murray v. Carrier · Schlup v. Delo · McCleskey v. Zant
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a state prisoner has defaulted a claim by violating a state procedural rule which would constitute adequate and independent grounds to bar direct review in the U.S. Supreme Court, he may not raise the claim in federal habeas, absent a showing of cause and prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[J]udicial discretion may be applied consistently when it entails`the exercise of judgment according to standards that, at least over time, can become known and understood within reasonable operating limits.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“generally fall into two categories: (1) rules that have been selectively applied to bar the claims of certain litigants . . . and (2) rules that are so unsettled due to ambiguous or changing state authority that applying them to bar a litigant's claim is unfair.”
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.