Butler v. Cain’s Empirical Analysis
533 F.3d 314 · 2008
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Eljack v. Alabama Department of Industrial Relations · Johnson v. Sawyer · Roberts v. Cockrell · Bridges v. Johnson · Salinas v. Dretke
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'AEDPA, not state law, determines when a judgment is final for federal habeas purposes.’ ” (quoting Foreman v. Dretke, 383 F.3d 336 , 339 (5th Cir.2004))); Roberts, 319 F.3d at 694 (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Scott v. Hubert · Scott v. Hubert“expiration of the time for seeking such review”
2 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.