Dolny v. Erickson’s Empirical Analysis
32 F.3d 381 · 1994
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2010 · most notably William O'sullivan v. Darren Boerckel (1999), Magouirk v. Phillips (1998)
7 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 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 Coleman v. Thompson · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Fay v. Noia · American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. United States · Idaho v. Wright
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[t]he right ... to raise' an issue referred to in § 2254 means more than a mere opportunity to seek leave to present an issue; it means a realistic, practical chance to present an issue and have it considered on the merits”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In sum, when the child whose hearsay testimony is admitted also testifies himself or herself, the only Confrontation Clause issue is whether the trial provided an opportunity for effective cross examination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“shall not be deemed to have exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the State . . . if he has the right under the law of the State to raise, by any available procedure, the question presented.”
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.