Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 20 F.3d 849 - Jones v. Jerrison

Jones v. Jerrison’s Empirical Analysis

20 F.3d 849 · 1994

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
1
states following
March 2023
most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably Vietchau Nguyen v. United States (1997), Abdullah v. Groose (1996)

24 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

3001994200020102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · McMann v. Richardson

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

  1. “In Missouri, a motion to recall the mandate is proper only when a state prisoner alleges that his appellate counsel was ineffective or argues that the appellate court's opinion directly conflicts with a decision of the United States Supreme Court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Because the state courts reviewed [petitioner's] claim under a plain-error standard, we also apply a plain-error standard on habeas review.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “interpreted liberally and . . . should be construed to encompass any allegation stating federal relief”
    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.