Maes v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
46 F.3d 979 · 1995
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 128 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably Hatch v. Oklahoma (1995), Nguyen v. Reynolds B (1997)
57 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Coleman v. Thompson · Murray v. Carrier · United States v. Frady · Ake v. Oklahoma
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 128 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A state conviction may only be set aside in a habeas proceeding on the basis of erroneous jury instructions when the errors had the effect of rendering the trial so fundamentally unfair as to cause a denial of a fair trial.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“A state court finding of procedural default is independent if it is separate and distinct from federal law.”
3 later decisions 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.