Buckley v. Ca Terhune’s Empirical Analysis
441 F.3d 688 · 2006
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Frantz v. Hazey (2008), Murray v. Schriro (2014)
21 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
Relies on Williams v. Taylor · Santobello v. New York · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Lindh v. Murphy · Lockyer Attorney General of California v. Andrade
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]n application for a writ of habeas corpus ... shall not be granted ... unless the adjudication of the claim— (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.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Frantz v. Hazey“[I]n a case in which the state has already received the benefit of the bargain, the harm caused by its breach is generally best repaired by specific performance of the plea agreement, although a defendant may, if he so chooses, elect instead to rescind the agreement and take his chances from there.”). A court cannot know whether the defendant has made an appropriate”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fox v. Johnson“the people will move the court to declare the murder to be murder in the second degree, with a maximum term of 15 years to life.”
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.