Dennis v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
354 F.3d 511 · 2003
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably United States v. Moore (2011), Williams v. Bagley (2004)
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · Williams v. Taylor · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Irvin v. Dowd
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“AEDPA states, in relevant part: An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim&emdash; (1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gray v. Moore · Harris v. Haeberlin“[g]enerally, to obtain a new trial for jury bias, a party must demonstrate: (1) that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question during voir dire, and (2) that a correct response would have provided the basis for a successful challenge for cause”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Franklin v. State
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.