Van Buskirk v. Baldwin’s Empirical Analysis
255 F.3d 974 · 2001
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Murray v. Carrier · Schlup v. Delo · Michael Wayne Williams v. John Taylor Warden
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The state showed that several mental health practitioners had declined to admit Van Buskirk for psychiatric treatment after he committed the offense. On the basis of this evidence, the district court observed that the record is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“chosen to reject Dr. Lezak's opinion is inconsistent with the standard announced in Schlup. Petitioner contends that the district court confused the Schlup standard with the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“replete with uncontested evidence of Petitioner's actions and statements about the crime that are contrary to Dr. Lezak's opinion about his mental state at the time.”
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.