Thomas Joe Miller-El v. Gary L. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division’s Empirical Analysis
261 F.3d 445 · 2001
Citation profile
19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
November 2017
most recently cited
8 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Slack v. McDaniel · Batson v. Kentucky · Lindh v. Murphy · Swain v. State of Alabama · Dusky 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(d) An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim— (1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] petitioner makes a `substantial showing' when he demonstrates that his petition involves issues which are debatable among jurists of reason, that another court could resolve the issues differently, or that the issues are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
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.