Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 624 F.3d 514 - Quezada v. Smith

Quezada v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

624 F.3d 514 · 2010

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
September 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Giglio v. United States · Magwood v. Patterson · Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Philip Morris Inc. · Ross v. Artuz

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

  1. “(2) A claim presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application under section 2254 that was not presented in a prior application shall be dismissed unless ... (B)(I) the factual predicate for the claim could not have been discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence; and (ii) the facts underlying the claim, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “could not have been discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence.”
    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.