Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 609 F.3d 1070 - Sines v. Wilner

Sines v. Wilner’s Empirical Analysis

609 F.3d 1070 · 2010

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
October 2017
most recently cited

5 federal appellate ·

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Slack v. McDaniel · Sanabria v. United States · Chambers v. United States · Bradshaw v. Story · Dale Becker v. Betty Montgomery Attorney General of Ohio

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

  1. “An application for a -writ of habeas corpus [ (§ 2241) ] in behalf of a prisoner who is authorized to apply for relief by motion pursuant to this section [ (§ 2255) ], shall not be entertained if it appears that the applicant has failed to apply for relief, by motion, to the court which sentenced him, or that such court has denied him relief, unless it also appears that the remedy by motion [ (§ 2255) ] is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.”
    2 later decisions 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.