Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 464 F.3d 963 - James Edward King v. A. Lamarque, Warden

James Edward King v. A. Lamarque, Warden’s Empirical Analysis

464 F.3d 963 · 2006

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
December 2015
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Slack v. McDaniel · Coleman v. Thompson · Schlup v. Delo · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Alabama Patterson · Ford v. Georgia

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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[o]nce the state has adequately pled the existence of an independent and adequate state procedural ground as an affirmative defense, the burden to place that defense in issue shifts to the petitioner. The petitioner may satisfy this burden by asserting specific factual allegations that demonstrate the inadequacy of the state procedure, including citation to authority demonstrating inconsistent application of the rule. Once having done so, ... it is the State who must bear the burden of demonstrating that the bar is applicable.”
    3 later decisions 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.