Antonelli v. Lappin’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Maleng v. Cook · Blau v. United States · Sammons v. Rodgers · Gallegos v. State of Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedures Art Paragraph a and C
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f a petitioner challenges his expired conviction in the context of its effect on an outstanding sentence of parole, the habeas court has the authority to consider the merits of those claims,”
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.