Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 392 F.3d 551 - Johnson v. Pinchak

Johnson v. Pinchak’s Empirical Analysis

392 F.3d 551 · 2004

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
September 2024
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably United States v. Massenburg (2009), Leyva v. Williams (2007)

8 federal appellate · 2 district ·

170200420102020decided

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 Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Murray v. Carrier · Arizona v. Fulminante

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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A] state court need not fear reaching the merits of a federal claim in an alternative holding. By its very definition, the adequate and independent state ground doctrine requires the federal court to honor a state holding that is a sufficient basis for the. state court’s judgment, even when the state court also relies on federal law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “firmly established and regularly followed”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.