Cargle v. Mullin’s Empirical Analysis
317 F.3d 1196 · 2003
Citation profile
96 federal appellate · 5 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 198 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2023 · most notably Holland v. Jackson (2004), Hooks v. Workman (2012)
96 federal appellate · 5 district · 12 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.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Coleman v. Thompson
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 198 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“has merit but is not so compelling, ... [we must assess] ... the issue relative to the rest of the appeal, and deferential consideration must be given to any professional judgment involved in its omission; of course, if the issue is meritless, its omission will not constitute deficient performance.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[C]laims of prosecutorial misconduct ... require a showing of fundamental unfairness in order to provide habeas relief, unless they involve the violation of specific constitutional rights.... [S]uch claims should be included in the cumulative-error calculus if they have been individually denied for insufficient prejudice.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Grant v. Royal · Underwood v. Royal“>a <span>state court</span> could deny relief for what it recognizes or assumes to be federal error, because of <span>the petitioner</span>'s failure to satisfy some independent state law predicate.</span> <span data-sentence-id=”
5 later decisions 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.