Carter v. Bradshaw’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3599 · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Atkins v. Virginia · Landis v. North American Co. · Ford v. Wainwright · Rhines v. Weber · Woodford Warden v. Garceau
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“could not reasonably be expected to recall and describe how well he was able to view the trial once he was removed from it ..., [ ] would be unable to elaborate on conversations he had with defense counsel regarding his competency ... [, and] does not have the present capability to judge and express to habeas counsel what mitigating evidence from his social and family background defense counsel should have introduced during the sentencing phase of trial because of his limited capacity to recall and convey the details about any such events.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Carter v. Bogan“Carter's mental illness prevent[ed] him from truly comprehending the nature of the habeas proceedings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Carter v. Bogan
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.