Herbst v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
42 F.3d 902 · 1995
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently August 2023
6 federal appellate · 1 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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Rose v. Lundy · McCleskey v. Zant · Maleng v. Cook · Granberry v. Greer · Riverbend Farms, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A habeas petitioner may attack a prior conviction used to enhance his punishment . . . . The jurisdictional requirement of 'in custody' is satisfied by reading the petition as a challenge to the current conviction.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] habeas petitioner may attack a prior conviction used to enhance his punishment”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Failure to exhaust does not constitute cause if the petitioner [was] aware of his new claims at the time he assert[ed] his previous petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hamm III v. Murphy
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.