McCarthy v. Harper’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Wetzel · United States v. Reliable Transfer Co. · Paul Harris v. Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Andpeter Petchess, Sheriff of Los Angeles County, Co-Respondents, the State Ofcalifornia, Real Party in Interest, Fawn Harris v. Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Andpeter Pitchess, Sheriff of Los Angeles, County, Co-Respondents, the People Ofthe State of California, Real Party in Interest
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability, an appeal may not be taken to the court of appeals from ... the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court- A certificate of appealability may issue ... only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right_ The certificate of appealability ... shall indicate which specific issue or issues satisfy the showing required. ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.