Cacoperdo v. Demosthenes’s Empirical Analysis
37 F.3d 504 · 1994
Citation profile
70 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 173 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Davis v. Woodford (2003), LaGrand v. Stewart (1998)
70 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Solem v. Helm · Vandygriff v. Phillips · Harmelin v. Michigan · Lisenba v. People of State of California
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 173 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A Traverse is not the proper pleading to raise additional grounds for relief.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“[h]abeas claims that are not raised before the district court in the petition are not cognizable on appeal,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Oden v. Bj Bunnell · Rochell v. Pl“(1) that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) that, but for counsel's errors, the result would have been different.”
3 later decisions 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.