White v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
22 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond · William O'sullivan v. Darren Boerckel · Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega · Neder v. United States · Tsu v. Tracy Federal Bank
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the movant provides persuasive reasons or circumstances that prevented him or her from filing the 60-1507 motion within the 1-year time limitation; (2) the merits of the movant's claim raise substantial issues of law or fact deserving of the district court's consideration; and (3) the movant sets forth a colorable claim of actual innocence, i.e., factual, not legal, innocence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Noyce v. State · Sherwood v. State“may be extended by the court only to prevent a manifest injustice.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Noyce v. State · Britt v. State“courts consider all factors under the totality of the circumstances rather than balancing factors against each other, need not give the factors equal weight, and should not consider any single factor dispositive.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Noyce v. State · Thuko v. State
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.