Bill Hall v. Ray H. Page, Warden’s Empirical Analysis
367 F.2d 352 · 1966
Citation profile
18
cited by 18 later decisions
March 1975
most recently cited
11 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Fay v. Noia · Western Natural Gas Co. v. Cities Service Gas Co. · Burns v. Crouse
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We hold that a federal court must grant an evidentiary hearing to a habeas applicant under the following circumstances: If (1) the merits of the factual dispute were not resolved in the state hearing; (2) the state factual determination is not fairly supported by the record as a whole; (3) the fact-finding procedure employed by the state court was not adequate to afford a full and fair hearing; (4) there is a substantial allegation of newly discovered evidence; (5) the material facts were not adequately developed at the state-court hearing; or (6) for any reason it appears that the state trier of fact did not afford the habeas applicant a full and fair fact hearing.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McGuffey v. Turner
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.