Griffin v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2021 · most notably Boyde v. Brown (2005), Wright v. Quarterman (2006)
5 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Gregg v. Georgia · Schlup v. Delo · Marks v. United States · Michael Wayne Williams v. John Taylor Warden · Harris v. Vasquez
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the applicant has failed to develop the factual basis of a claim in state court proceedings, the court shall not hold an evidentiary hearing on the claim unless the applicant can show that— (A) the claim relies on— (i) a new rule of constitutional law ...; or (ii) a factual predicate that could not have been previously discovered through the exercise of due diligence; and (B) the facts underlying the claim would be sufficient to éstablish by clear and convincing evidence that but for constitutional error, no reasonable fact-finder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Because psychiatrists [let alone psychologists] disagree widely and frequently on what constitutes mental illness,” we have observed that evaluations such as Dr. Stanulis’s merit little weight on habeas review because “a defendant could ... always provide a showing of factual innocence by hiring psychiatric experts who would reach a favorable conclusion.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“within thirty-five days of the district court's entry of its order denying[, in part, his] certificate of appealability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.