Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 321 F.3d 994 - Roberts v. Callahan

Roberts v. Callahan’s Empirical Analysis

321 F.3d 994 · 2003

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
January 2024
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2024 · most notably Denedo v. United States (2008), Ackerman v. Novak (2007)

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

180200320102020decided

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 Murray v. Carrier · Spencer v. Kemna · Burns v. Wilson · Calley v. Callaway · Watson v. Ol McCotter

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.

  1. “If the grounds for relief that Petitioner raised in the district court were fully and fairly reviewed in the military courts, then the district court was proper in not considering those issues. Likewise, if a ground for relief was not raised in the military courts, then the district court must deem that ground waived. The only exception to the waiver rule is that a petitioner may obtain relief by showing cause and actual prejudice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) [t]he asserted error must be of substantial constitutional dimension[;] (2) [t]he issue must be one of law rather than of disputed fact already determined by the military tribunals[;] (3) [military considerations may warrant different treatment of constitutional claims[; and] (4) [t]he military courts must give adequate consideration to the issues involved and apply proper legal standards.”
    2 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.