Carter v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
131 F.3d 452 · 1997
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably Trevino v. Johnson (1999), Hill v. Johnson (2000)
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Strickland v. Washington · United States v. Agurs · Jackson v. Denno · Kyles v. Whitley · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“GVR” refers to the Supreme Court's practice of granting certiorari, vacating, and remanding for further consideration in light of some intervening development. The practice is thoroughly explained in Lawrence v. Chater, 516 U.S. 163 , 165-75, 116 S.Ct. at 604, 605-10, 133 L.Ed.2d 545 (1996) (per curiam). See Carter v. Johnson, 131 F.3d 452 , 457 n. 2 (5th Cir.1997). 3 .See Flanagan v. Ahearn (In re Asbestos Litig.), 90 F.3d 963 (5th Cir.1996) (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“federal habeas courts are no longer authorized to exercise de novo review over the ultimate issue of voluntariness, a mixed question of law and fact. Instead, [the court is] obliged to respect the judgment of the state court, provided it does not constitute an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Washington v. Johnson, 90 F.3d 945 , 949-50 (5th Cir.1996) (citing Cooper v. Oklahoma, 517 U.S. 348 , 355, 116 S.Ct. 1373, 1377, 134 L.Ed.2d 498 (1996)), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 1259, 137 L.Ed.2d 338 (1997).The constitutional standard for competency to stand trial is whether the defendant”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Moody v. Johnson
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.