LaFevers v. Gibson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

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

1. “an assertion of actual innocence, although operating as a potential pathway for reaching otherwise defaulted constitutional claims, does not, standing alone, support the granting of the writ of habeas corpus.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Delmart v. Zupan · Farrar v. Raemisch

2. “(2) A claim presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application under section 2254 that was not presented in a prior application shall be dismissed unless— (B) (i) the factual predicate for the claim 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.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ross v. Berghuis · 337 F. App'x 316 - McLeod v. Peguese

3. “Upon the filing of [a] second § 2254 petition [authorized by the circuit court], the district court was obligated to determine whether the petition did, in fact, satisfy the requirements of § 2244(b).”). 9 . Indeed, since the passage of the AEDPA in 1996, it appears Atkins represents the only such new rule. 10 . As this quotation should make clear, the mere absence of procedural guidelines in Atkins, standing alone, does not justify a conclusion that Ochoa’s procedural irregularity claims are not Atkins claims for purposes of § 2244(b)(2)(A). As Bobby recognizes, Atkins is also bereft of substantive guidance as to the meaning of the term "mental retardation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ochoa v. Workman