Fahy v. Horn’s Empirical Analysis
516 F.3d 169 · 2008
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably Thomas v. Horn (2009), Lewis v. Horn (2009)
19 federal appellate · 9 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. § 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 Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Batson v. Kentucky · Williams v. Taylor · United States v. Leon
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is indisputably true that a criminal defendant has the right to an adequate review of his conviction, i. e., a sufficiently complete record. Mayer v. City of Chicago, 404 U.S. 189, 198 , 92 S.Ct. 410 , 30 L.Ed.2d 372 (1971). However, as the District Court aptly pointed out, neither the Supreme Court, nor our Court, has held that due process requires a verbatim transcript of the entire proceedings or that an incomplete record confers automatic entitlement to relief. This Court has recognized a defendant’s request for a complete transcript only when the defendant has shown a “color-able need” for the transcript. Karabin v. Petsock, 758 F.2d 966, 969 (3d Cir. 1985) (citing Mayer, 404 U.S. at 195 , 92 S.Ct. 410 ). Specifically, “[a] criminal defendant must first' show a ‘colorable need’ for a complete transcript before the state must meet its burden of showing that something less will suffice.” Id.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“when a state court's waiver colloquy fails to reveal whether the requirements of a valid waiver have been met due to procedural infirmities, substantive deficiencies, and an insufficient probing into a defendant's knowledge of the rights he is waiving, the findings by that court concerning the waiver are too unreliable to be considered 'factual determinations.' " Id. at 183 . Thus, the court held that the trial court's finding of waiver was not "entitled to the presumption of correctness.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In a proceeding instituted by an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court, a determination of a factual issue made by a State court shall be presumed to be correct. The applicant shall have the burden of rebutting the presumption of correctness by clear and convincing evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.