Bible v. Schriro’s Empirical Analysis
651 F.3d 1060 · 2011
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3599 · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on State v. Bible · Rohan Gates v. Woodford · Woratzeck v. Stewart · Bible v. Ryan · King v. Trujillo
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(A) the applicant shows that the claim relies on a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable; or (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.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. West v. Ryan · West v. Ryan“[p]ermitting a state prisoner to file a second or successive federal habeas corpus petition is not the general rule, it is the exception, and an exception that may be invoked only when the demanding standard set by Congress is met.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A prima facie showing is a sufficient showing of possible merit to warrant a fuller exploration by the district court, and we will grant an application for [a second or successive] petition if it appears reasonably likely that the application satisfies the stringent requirements for the filing of a second or successive petition.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); see also United States v. Villa-Gonzalez, 208 F.3d 1160 , 1165 (9th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (”
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.