Coleman v. Calderon’s Empirical Analysis
150 F.3d 1105 · 1998
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 5 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2018 · most notably Calderon v. Coleman (1998), Victor Wayne Hooks v. Ron Ward (1999)
17 federal appellate · 5 district · 8 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
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) · 28 U.S.C. § 2261 (§ 107 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Wolff v. McDonnell · Kotteakos v. United States · Gregg v. Georgia
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““To decide this question, we look to Boyde v. California, 494 U. S. 370 (1990). Wien the inaccuracy undermines the jury’s understanding of sentencing options, ‘there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury has applied the challenged instruction in a way that prevents the consideration of constitutionally relevant evidence.’ Boyde, 494 U. S. at 380 . “We conclude the district court did not err in holding that Coleman was denied due process by the state trial court’s inaccurate commutation instruction.” 150 F. 3d, at 1119 (citations omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Calderon v. Coleman“[I]n the absence of a specific request, counsel does not have a duty to gather background information which an expert needs. Part of the skill of an expert is to recognize what information he needs in order to render an opinion. To require an attorney, without interdisciplinary guidance, to provide a psychiatric expert with all information necessary to reach a mental health diagnosis demands that an attorney already be possessed of the skill and knowledge of the expert.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Caro v. Calderon“a constitutionally compelled rule of pretrial discovery.” Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 , 52, 107 S.Ct. 989 , 94 L.Ed.2d 40 (1987) (plurality opinion); accord Coleman v. Calderon, 150 F.3d 1105 , 1112 (9th Cir.), reversed on other grounds, 525 U.S. 141 , 145, 119 S.Ct. 500 , 142 L.Ed.2d 521 (1998) (per curiam). But see Kentucky v. Stincer, 482 U.S. 730 , 738 n. 9, 107 S.Ct. 2658 , 96 L.Ed.2d 631 (1987) (”
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.