Davis v. Norris’s Empirical Analysis
423 F.3d 868 · 2005
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently March 2022 · most notably Ochoa v. Sirmons (2007), In re Henry (2014)
20 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · Ake v. Oklahoma · Woodson v. North Carolina · Atkins v. Virginia
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A decision is `contrary to' federal law... if a state court has arrived `at a conclusion opposite to that reached by [the Supreme Court] on a question of law' or if it `confronted facts that are materially indistinguishable from a relevant Supreme Court precedent' but arrived at an opposite result.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rousan v. Roper“A state court unreasonably applies clearly established federal law when it `identifies the correct governing legal principle from [the Supreme] Court's decisions but unreasonably applies that principle to the facts of the prisoner's case.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rousan v. Roper
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.