Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 33 F.3d 933 - Parkus v. Delo

Parkus v. Delo’s Empirical Analysis

33 F.3d 933 · 1994

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
July 2013
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably Sidebottom v. Delo (1995), Randall Eugene Cannon v. Gary Gibson (2001)

30 federal appellate · 1 district ·

300199420002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Kotteakos v. United States · United States v. Bagley · Brecht v. Abrahamson

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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “ordinarily turn[s] on whether the prisoner can show that some objective factor external to the defense impeded counsel's efforts to comply with the State's procedural rule.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A petitioner may demonstrate an objective impediment to compliance with a procedural rule by showing that the `factual or legal basis for a claim was not reasonably available to counsel, or that some interference by officials made compliance impracticable.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(1) manifest the prosecutor's intention to call attention to the defendant's failure to testify, or (2) are such that the jury would naturally and necessarily take them as a comment on the defendant's failure to testify.”
    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.