Dockins v. Hines’s Empirical Analysis
374 F.3d 935 · 2004
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 241 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably Turrentine v. Mullin (2004), Laurson v. Leyba (2007)
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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 · Jackson v. Virginia · Slack v. McDaniel · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Estelle v. McGuire
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 241 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(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; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“AEDPA's deferential treatment of state court decisions must be incorporated into our consideration of a habeas petitioner's request for COA.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a conviction for purposes of habeas corpus relief, clearly established Supreme Court precedent provides that "the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. West v. Addison · Webber v. Scott
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.