Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 162 F.3d 855 - Little v. Johnson

Little v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

162 F.3d 855 · 1998

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
2
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Russel William Burket v. Ronald Angelone, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections (2000), Moore v. Gibson (1999)

18 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

510199820002010decided

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. Bagley · Coleman v. Thompson · Kyles v. Whitley

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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “When the ground upon which the petitioner relies for habeas relief was not exhausted in state court and state procedural rules would bar subsequent presentation of the argument, this court may not consider the claim absent 'cause' and 'prejudice'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Deficient performance is prejudicial only upon a showing that but for counsel’s errors, there is a reasonable probability that the ultimate result would have been different and that confidence in the reliability of the verdict is undermined.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.”
    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.