Coleman v. Hardy’s Empirical Analysis
628 F.3d 314 · 2010
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Schlup v. Delo · Herrera v. Collins · Schriro v. Landrigan
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“element of an actual-innocence claim). See also Coleman v. Hardy, 628 F.3d 314, 319 (7th Cir.2010) ( habeas petitioner asserting innocence as gateway to defaulted claim must show that, in light of new evidence, it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt); Morales v. Johnson, 659 F.3d 588, 605 (7th Cir.2011) (noting that this”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“not itself a constitutional claim, but instead a gateway through which a habeas petitioner must pass to have his otherwise barred constitutional claim considered on the merits.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“incriminating testimony from [fellow] inmates, suspects, or friends or relations of the accused”
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.