Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 506 U.S. 390 - Herrera v. Collins

Herrera v. Collins’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

3,365
cited by 3,365 later decisions
66
cited 66 times by the Supreme Court
36
states following
May 2026
most recently cited

1,066 federal appellate · 151 district · 586 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3,365 later decisions (66 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2026 · most notably County of Sacramento v. Lewis (1998), Schlup v. Delo (1995)

1,066 federal appellate · 151 district · 586 state decisions — followed in 36 states

1.4k01993200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

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

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Mathews v. Eldridge · In the Matter of Samuel Winship

Cited together with Strickland v. Washington · Schlup v. Delo · Murray v. Carrier · Brady v. State of Maryland · Coleman v. Thompson

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 3,365 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the threshold showing for such an assumed right would necessarily be extraordinarily high.”
    49 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “not itself a constitutional claim, but instead a gateway through which a habeas petitioner must pass to have his otherwise barred constitutional claim considered on the merits.”
    35 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Claims of actual innocence based on newly discovered evidence have never been held to state a ground for federal habeas relief absent an independent constitutional violation occurring in the underlying state criminal proceeding.”
    24 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.