Crone v. Cockrell’s Empirical Analysis
324 F.3d 833 · 2003
Citation profile
16 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2020 · most notably Leal Garcia v. Quarterman (2009), Benchoff v. Colleran (2005)
16 federal appellate ·
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Rose v. Lundy · Jones v. Wj Estelle · Whitehead v. Johnson · United States v. Torres
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.
“Under the abuse-of-the-writ doctrine, a subsequent petition is second or successive when it raises a claim that was, or could have been, raised in an earlier petition. In accordance with our strong policy against piecemealing claims, we have long held that under an abuse of the writ standard, the sole fact that the new claims were unexhausted when the earlier federal writ was prosecuted will not excuse their omission.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Propes v. Quarterman“that mixed petitions, meaning those containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims, should be dismissed without prejudice would have little meaning if it could be avoided by withholding unexhausted claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“knew of all of the facts necessary to raise [the claim raised in his second petition] before he filed his initial federal petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Parker v. Davis
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.