Mendez v. Small’s Empirical Analysis
298 F.3d 1154 · 2002
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Williams v. Taylor · Lindh v. Murphy · Bell Warden v. Cone · Bouie v. City of Columbia · United States v. Lanier
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A state court has the last word on the interpretation of state law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. White v. Nooth · Bradley v. Duncan“an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bradley v. Duncan
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.