Fuller v. Gorczyk’s Empirical Analysis
273 F.3d 212 · 2001
Citation profile
18 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably Cotto v. Herbert (2003), Jimenez v. Walker (2006)
18 federal appellate ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Williams v. Taylor · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Arizona v. Fulminante
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“fail[ure] to guess a theory of relevance that was not argued”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Nappi v. Yelich · Scrimo v. Lee“A federal court may not grant habeas simply because, in its independent judgment, the `relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously or incorrectly.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Howard v. Walker“if the state court identifies the correct governing legal principle from [the Supreme] Court's decisions but unreasonably applies that principle to the facts of the prisoner's case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Howard v. Walker
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.