Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 421 F.3d 1221 - Lawrence v. Florida

Lawrence v. Florida’s Empirical Analysis

421 F.3d 1221 · 2005

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2020 · most notably Lawrence v. Florida (2007), Holland v. Florida (2010)

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

310200520102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 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 Slack v. McDaniel · Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs · McCleskey v. Zant · Marks v. United States · Hopkins v. Reeves

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

  1. “when the State’s conduct prevents the petitioner from timely filing”); Curtiss v. Mt. Pleasant Corr. Facility, 338 F.3d 851 , 855 (8th Cir.2003) (equitable tolling warranted when”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Making the most of a novel argument, Lawrence posits that the State’s provision to him of an incompetent attorney justifies the imposition of equitable tolling. This is not an extraordinary circumstance that warrants the application of equitable tolling.”
    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.