Meanes v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
138 F.3d 1007 · 1998
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently February 2012
3 federal appellate ·
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 Strickland v. Washington · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Coleman v. Thompson · Teague v. Lane · Murray v. Carrier
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In a habeas corpus appeal, we review the district court's findings of fact for clear error and review its conclusions of law de novo, applying the same standard of review to the state court's decision as the district court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martinez v. Johnson“If a petitioner fails to show cause for his procedural default, the court need not address the prejudice prong of the test.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[C]ounsel's ineffectiveness will constitute cause only if it is an independent constitutional violation.”
1 later decision 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.