Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 258 F.3d 520 - Steverson v. Summers

Steverson v. Summers’s Empirical Analysis

258 F.3d 520 · 2001

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
April 2018
most recently cited

8 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Custis v. United States · Maleng v. Cook · Daniels v. United States · Lackawanna County District Attorney v. Coss

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

  1. “entertain an application for a writ of habeas corpus [o]n behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “U.S.S.G.”). 3 . “Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is essentially equivalent to § 2254, the former being a postcon-viction remedy for federal prisoners and the latter available to 'a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “prior conviction[s] used to enhance [his] federal sentence [are] no longer open to direct or collateral attack in [their] own right because the defendant failed to pursue those remedies while they were available.”
    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.