Thomas Nevius v. Ek McDaniel Order’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “(A) the applicant shows that the claim [he raises] relies on a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable; or (B)(i) the factual predicate for the claim [he raises] could not have been discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence; and (ii) the facts underlying the claim, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Beltran v. Dexter

2. “A state court decision is `contrary to' federal law established by the Supreme Court `if the state court arrives at a conclusion opposite to that reached by [the Supreme] Court on a question of law or if the state court decides a case differently than [the Supreme] Court has on a set of materially indistinguishable facts.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dennis Mark La v. Peggy Kernan Attorney Generalof the State Ofcalifornia

3. “duty under 2244(b)(1) and (2) to examine each claim of the second petition and to dismiss the claims that did not meet the requirements of those subsections”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. LaFevers v. Gibson