James v. Borg’s Empirical Analysis
24 F.3d 20 · 1994
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 132 later decisions — most recently October 2023 · most notably Hendricks v. Calderon (1995), Calderon v. Prunty (1995)
50 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Griffin v. California · Rose v. Lundy · Carnegie 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 132 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The principal purpose of the information is to provide the defendant with a description of the charges against him in sufficient detail to enable him to prepare his defense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[c]onclusory allegations which are not supported by a statement of specific facts do not warrant habeas relief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Noguera v. Davis · Jones v. Gomez“vehicle's owner or an individual with a legitimate privacy interest in the vehicle may challenge [a] search”
2 later decisions 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.