Carriger v. Stewart’s Empirical Analysis
132 F.3d 463 · 1997
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 7 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 180 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Byrd v. Collins (2000), Cargle v. Mullin (2003)
79 federal appellate · 7 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. Bagley
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 180 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... the prosecution, which alone can know what is undisclosed, must be assigned the consequent responsibility to gauge the likely net effect of all such [undisclosed favorable] evidence and make disclosure when the point of “reasonable probability” is reached. This is turn means that the individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence knoum to others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“a petitioner must show that in light of all the evidence, including new evidence, `it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have found petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“a habeas petitioner asserting a freestanding innocence claim must go beyond demonstrating doubt about his guilt, and must affirmatively prove that he is probably innocent.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.