Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 F.3d 962 - McBride v. Sharpe

McBride v. Sharpe’s Empirical Analysis

25 F.3d 962 · 1994

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
November 2017
most recently cited

25 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably United States v. Cook (1995), Mapes v. Coyle (1999)

25 federal appellate ·

310199420002010decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 46

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Estelle v. McGuire · Pennsylvania v. Finley · Kuhlmann v. Wilson · Lane v. Peterson

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

  1. “We find Rule 56(c) notice inconsistent with a Habeas Rule 8(a) disposition when the parties do not raise issues requiring a factual inquiry outside the record and the district court does not rely on material outside the record in disposing of the petition. Thus, we hold that the ten-day notice requirement of Rule 56(c) does not apply to such a disposition pursuant to Habeas Rule [12].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In a federal habeas case, a written finding made by a state court of competent jurisdiction after a hearing on the merits of a factual issue in a proceeding to which the petitioner and the state were parties shall be presumed to be correct unless a statutory exception applies.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[I]t is not the province of a federal habeas court to reexamine state court determinations on state law questions.”
    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.