Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 529 U.S. 420 - Michael Wayne Williams v. John Taylor Warden

Michael Wayne Williams v. John Taylor Warden’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

2,525
cited by 2,525 later decisions
35
cited 35 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
June 2026
most recently cited

1,121 federal appellate · 136 district · 31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,525 later decisions (35 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division (2003), Rose v. Lee (2001)

1,121 federal appellate · 136 district · 31 state decisions — followed in 10 states

1.7k0200020102020decided

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

reviewedCardwell v. Greene (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

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

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. · Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership

Cited together with Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · Coleman v. Thompson · Brady v. State of Maryland · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden

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 2,525 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A] failure to develop the factual basis of a claim is not established unless there is lack of diligence, or some greater fault, attributable to the prisoner or the prisoner's counsel.”
    163 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(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.”
    29 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “failed to develop the factual basis of a claim”
    23 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.