Kennedy v. Herring’s Empirical Analysis
54 F.3d 678 · 1995
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently April 2011 · most notably 760 So. 2d 903 - Way v. State (2000), Anthony Keith Johnson v. State of Alabama (2001)
15 federal appellate · 3 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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. Bagley · Coleman v. Thompson · Teague v. Lane
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The petition in this case reads as if it were both petition and brief.... This practice, which has become common, is not contemplated either by the habeas rules or the civil rules and makes it difficult for courts to identify discrete claims in a petition. We expressly disapprove the practice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[F]inding cause in a lack of resources would be inconsistent with the settled principle that a state need not provide counsel in collateral proceedings, even for petitioners under sentence of death.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bannister v. Delo“this reliance could not be cause to excuse a state procedural default. Brand concerned federal exhaustion doctrine, not state procedural rules.”
1 later decision 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.