Sloan v. Delo’s Empirical Analysis
54 F.3d 1371 · 1995
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Ramsey v. Bowersox (1998), Cox v. Norris (1997)
32 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 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 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Darden v. Wainwright · Lockhart v. Fretwell
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.
“[I]f the state procedural rule is unclear, or has been inconsistently applied, or appears to be a new rule designed to thwart the assertion of federal rights in the very case under review, ... a federal habeas court [ ] might well conclude that such a rule of state law, valid though it may be for merely state law purposes, would not suffice to bar habeas review ....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“as long as the sentencing body finds at least one valid aggravating factor, the fact that it also finds an invalid aggravating factor does not infect the formal process of deciding whether death is an appropriate penalty.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The evidence that defendant repeatedly beat Trooper Froemsdorf across the face with his still handcuffed left hand, that defendant temporarily incapacitated the trooper by firing a shot into the trooper’s bulletproof vest, and that defendant took advantage of this temporary incapacity by pumping- not one, but two, .357 magnum slugs through the helpless trooper’s neck, provided justification for the jury’s finding that the murder was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible, or inhuman in that it involved depravity of mind.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mallett v. Bowersox
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.