Weeks v. Angelone’s Empirical Analysis
176 F.3d 249 · 1999
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 5 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2023 · most notably Weeks v. Angelone (2000), Beverly A. Seymour v. Diane Walker,respondent-Appellee (2000)
21 federal appellate · 5 district · 6 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Coleman v. Thompson · Teague v. Lane · Murray v. Carrier · Estelle v. McGuire
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a petitioner has properly presented a claim to the state court but the state court has not adjudicated the claim on the merits, however, our review of questions of law and mixed questions of law and fact is de novo.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) whether the police had given [Petti-ford] Miranda warnings at the first interrogation and [he] acknowledged that he understood the warnings; (2) whether the police immediately ceased the interrogation when [Pettiford] indicated that he did not want to answer questions; (3) whether the police resumed questioning [Pettiford] only after the passage of a significant period of time; (4) whether the police provided a fresh set of Miranda warnings before the second interrogation; and (5) whether the second interrogation was restricted to a crime that had not been a subject of the earlier interrogation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
3 later decisions 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.