Wilson v. Corcoran’s Empirical Analysis
562 U.S. 1 · 2010
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Estelle v. McGuire · Zant v. Stephens · Lewis v. Jeffers · Wainwright v. Goode · Corcoran v. State
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.
“[I]t is only noncompliance with federal law that renders a State's criminal judgment susceptible to collateral attack in the federal courts.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“not the province of a federal habeas court to reexamine state-court determinations on state-law questions,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Thomas v. Stephenson
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.