Wall v. Kholi’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedKholi v. Wall (from First Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Murray v. Carrier · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Massaro v. United States · United States v. Robinson · United State v. Morgan
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'collateral review' of a judgment or claim means a judicial reexamination of a judgment or claim in a proceeding outside of the direct review process.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is entered on the docket of the original criminal case and is typically referred to the judge who originally presided over the challenged proceedings, see § 2255 Rules 3(b), 4(a), but there is no dispute that § 2255 proceedings are 'collateral' ”); United States v. Fiorelli, 337 F.3d 282 , 286 (3d Cir.2003) (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“judicial reexamination of the sentence to determine whether a more lenient sentence is proper”
2 later decisions 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.