Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 176 F.3d 210 - Roach v. Angelone

Roach v. Angelone’s Empirical Analysis

176 F.3d 210 · 1999

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
December 2021
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably Bacon v. Lee (2000), Cooey v. Coyle (2002)

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

2601999200020102020decided

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. § 1291 · 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)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Coleman v. Thompson · Gregg v. Georgia · Furman 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the factual or legal basis for the claim was not reasonably available to the claimant at the time of the state proceeding.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]ny decision you make regarding punishment must be unanimous”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he Virginia sentencing scheme does not require juries to make findings as to specific mitigating factors. Instead, juries are instructed to consider all possible mitigating circumstances before rendering their sentence decision.”
    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.