In Re: Richard a Smith’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 7 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Prost v. Anderson (2011), Bryant v. Warden, FCC Coleman-Medium (2013)
9 federal appellate · 7 district ·
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
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Bailey v. United States · State of New Hampshire v. State of Maine · Bousley v. United States · Smith 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that his § 924(c) conviction was no longer valid, the defendant in Smith was unable to make the prima facie showing required to obtain authorization to file a second § 2255 motion. Id. at 7-8. Thus, the court turned to the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Reed v. Thomas“a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“remedy by motion is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Reed v. Thomas
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.