Brambles v. Duncan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate ·

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

1. “If anything was misleading, it was what the district court did not tell Brambles — that the dismissal of his first petition would effectively be final unless he could establish that the statute of limitations period was equitably tolled, and that the stay and abey process was available. However, the Supreme Court in Pliler admonished district courts against attempting to explain to pro se litigants these federal habeas procedures, stating that attempting to do so might prove to be misleading. Pliler, 124 S.Ct. at 2446 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Ford v. Pliler

2. “Request this [c]ourt to dismiss the current petition without prejudice to any right petitioner may have to file a new petition once available state remedies are exhausted as to all claims. (Petitioner is cautioned that recently amended 28 U.S.C. § 2244 limits the time period within which a petition may be filed.) (emphasis in original).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sossa v. Diaz

3. “if the petitioner is affirmatively misled, either by the court or by the State, equitable tolling might well be appropriate. This is a question for the Ninth Circuit to consider on remand.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Sossa v. Diaz