Fail v. Hubbard’s Empirical Analysis
272 F.3d 1133 · 2001
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Rose v. Lundy · Duncan v. Walker · George Duncan Superintendent Great Meadow Correctional Facility v. Sherman Walker · Christopher Artuz Superintendent Green Haven Correctional Facility v. Tony Bruce Bennett · Willie Lee Miles v. Kw Prunty Attorney General of the State of California
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an application for federal habeas corpus review is not an `application for State post-conviction or other collateral review' within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(d)(2).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“extraordinary circumstances beyond the petitioner's control ... [make] it impossible to file a timely federal habeas petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jorss v. Gomez
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.