Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 548 F.3d 993 - Melson v. Allen

Melson v. Allen’s Empirical Analysis

548 F.3d 993 · 2008

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Giglio v. United States · Schlup v. Delo · Herrera v. Collins · House v. Bell

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

  1. “The limitation period shall run from the latest of— (A) the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review; (B) the date on which the impediment to filing an application created by State action in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the applicant was prevented from filing by such State action; (C) the date on which the constitutional right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or (D) the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A claim of actual innocence is only credible where a petitioner ... supports] his allegations of constitutional error with new reliable evidence ... that was not presented at trial____ The petitioner must show that in light of this new evidence, it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him.” (internal quotations and citation omitted)). 45 . This Court has previously held that”
    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.