Perkins v. McQuiggin’s Empirical Analysis
670 F.3d 665 · 2012
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Slack v. McDaniel · Murray v. Carrier · Schlup v. Delo · McCleskey v. Zant · Pace v. Superintendent State Correctional Institution at Graterford
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.
“Requiring reasonable diligence effectively makes the concept of the actual innocence gateway redundant, since petitioners ... seek [an equitable exception only] when they were not reasonably diligent in complying with § 2244(d)(1)(D).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.