Daniels v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
316 F.3d 477 · 2003
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2023
6 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Slack v. McDaniel · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Williams v. Taylor · Faretta v. 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“evidence on which [a federal claim] is premised was only discovered [after the conclusion of state court proceedings,] it does not trigger the deference mandate of AEDPA”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Monroe v. Angelone“[h]ad there been any possibility of confusion, it was eliminated when [the witness] corrected [him]self.”
1 later decision 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.