Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 F.3d 167 - Sams v. Walker

Sams v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

18 F.3d 167 · 1994

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
November 2007
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on United States v. Wade · Teague v. Lane · United States v. Frady · Cupp v. Naughten · Santoni v. United States

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

  1. “[i]n order to obtain a writ of habeas corpus in federal court on the ground of error in a state court's instructions to the jury on matters of state law, the petitioner must show not only that the instruction misstated state law but also that the error violated a right guaranteed to him by federal law.”
    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.