Angel Ramos Hinojos v. William G. Black, Superintendent’s Empirical Analysis
462 F.2d 621 · 1972
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
August 2003
most recently cited
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on McDonald v. Pless · Bateman v. Donovan
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The misconduct of the two jurors ... falls short of the kind of constitutional defect which would justify relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in the district court. There was no showing of a fraudulent concealment of bias, nor of any other exceptional circumstances that would justify deviation from the rule that affidavits of jurors cannot be used to impeach their verdict.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Solis v. Cockrell
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.