McClendon v. Sherman’s Empirical Analysis
329 F.3d 490 · 2003
Citation profile
13 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on State v. Murnahan · Goldberg v. Ellett · Alabama v. Bozeman · Ganey v. North Carolina · Reno v. Kim Ho Ma
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the petitioner’s lack of notice of the filing requirement; (2) the petitioner’s lack of constructive knowledge of the filing requirement; (3) diligence in pursuing one’s rights; (4) absence of prejudice to the respondent; and (5) the petitioner’s reasonableness in remaining ignorant of the legal requirement for filing his claim.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limitation period shall run from the latest of- (A) the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review; [[Image here]] (2) The time during which a properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect to the pertinent judgment or claim is pending shall not be counted toward any period of limitation under this subsection.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McSwain v. Davis · Bell v. Howes“We reject McClendon's contention that whenever a prisoner raises an allegation in his state post-conviction proceedings that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, his conviction does not become final until those state post-conviction proceedings have ended.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Allen v. Yukins
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.