Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 555 F.3d 1346 - Holladay v. Allen

Holladay v. Allen’s Empirical Analysis

555 F.3d 1346 · 2009

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
4
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Hill v. Humphrey (2011), Thomas v. Allen (2010)

15 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

310200920102020decided

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 Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Atkins v. Virginia · Holladay v. Haley · 549 So. 2d 122 - Holladay v. State · Putman v. Zant

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

  1. “Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder's choice between them cannot be clearly erroneous.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A diagnosis of borderline intellectual functioning will not qualify for exemption from the death penalty.” Holladay v. Allen, 555 F.3d 1346, 1353 (11th Cir.2009) (citation omitted). .The DSM-5 also lists BIF as a”
    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.