Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 504 F.3d 357 - Leyva v. Williams

Leyva v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

504 F.3d 357 · 2007

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
September 2024
most recently cited

6 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Powell v. Symons (2012), Evans v. Secretary Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (2011)

6 federal appellate ·

240200720102020decided

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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on United States v. Olano · Coleman v. Thompson · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Murray v. Carrier · Sibron v. State of New York Peters

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

  1. “An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings 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 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.