Urinyi v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
607 F.3d 318 · 2010
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on McCleskey v. Zant · United States v. Crosby · Pratt v. United States · United States of America v. Javier Orozco-Ramirez · James v. Walsh
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For a petition to qualify as a second or successive petition under § 2255, it therefore must be at least the second petition attacking the same judgment of conviction on the ground that the sentence was not legally imposed. Because Petitioner’s first petition did not contend that his sentence was illegally imposed, his first petition, regardless of how he designated it, would not have been a first petition under § 2255.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vu v. United States“one full opportunity to seek collateral review”
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.