Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 178 F.3d 434 - Carson v. Burke

Carson v. Burke’s Empirical Analysis

178 F.3d 434 · 1999

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
November 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Lancaster v. Adams (2003), Scott v. Collins (2002)

6 federal appellate ·

350199920002010decided

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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Granberry v. Greer · United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians · Calderon v. Fields · Rickman v. Bell · Magouirk v. Phillips

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

  1. “A more proper interpretation of Rule 9(a), consistent with the Suspension Clause, is that rather than imposing a statute of limitations, the Rule invokes the equitable doctrine of laches. As applied here, the doctrine posits a two-pronged test. First, the state must appear to have been prejudiced in its ability to respond to petitioner’s claims. Second, the petitioner must be given the opportunity to meet or rebut the apparent prejudice to the state, or to show that whatever prejudice the state has suffered would not have been avoided had the petition been filed earlier.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The court took judicial notice that the trial judge in the underlying case is deceased, the prosecutor who tried the case has left public service, and the defense attorney’s location is unknown. From these undisputed facts, the court concluded that Carson’s delay in bringing this petition had prejudiced the government, and that Carson has not established that a miscarriage of justice occurred in his case or that he is innocent in fact.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.”
    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.