Moody v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
139 F.3d 477 · 1998
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Francis S. v. Stone (2000), 748 So. 2d 1028 - Stephens v. State (1999)
20 federal appellate · 2 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 Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Olano · Giglio v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lave v. Dretke · Green v. Johnson“[b]efore the federal district court has a duty to investigate a habeas petitioner's claim of incompetency, the petitioner must show that there are sufficient facts to 'positively, unequivocally and clearly generate a real, substantial and legitimate doubt as to the mental capacity of the petitioner to meaningfully participate and cooperate with counsel during trial.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“brief and then withdrawsfrom the case pursuant to Anders, not identifying any arguable issues for appeal but only stating that the appeal is meritless. This question is presented in a context whereby Harris submitted pro se assignments of error. 11 Harris filed his habeas corpus petition prior to enactment of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Harris v. Day
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.