Cannon v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
134 F.3d 683 · 1998
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 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)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Lindh v. Murphy · Lockhart v. Fretwell · Barefoot v. Estelle · Carafas v. J
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Thus, [Pyles] does not need further certification from a circuit judge before we can hear the merits of his appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pyles 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.