Snowden v. Singletary’s Empirical Analysis
135 F.3d 732 · 1998
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Eze v. Senkowski (2003), United States v. Henderson (2005)
30 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
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 Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Rose v. Lundy · Brown v. Allen · Picard v. Connor
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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen it is obvious that the unexhausted claims would be procedurally barred in state court due to a state-law procedural default, we . . . treat those claims now barred by state law as [procedurally defaulted with] no basis for federal habeas relief.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An application for writ of habeas corpus ... shall not be granted unless it appears that the applicant has exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the State....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]itness credibility is the sole province of the jury.”
2 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.