Porter v. Allbaugh’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 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) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Slack v. McDaniel · Estelle v. McGuire · Lindh v. Murphy · Missouri v. Hunter · Harrington v. Richter
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[E]ven if we gave [applicant] the benefit of the equitable-tolling arguments that he advanced before the district court- viz., general difficulties in obtaining trial transcripts and in accessing the prison law library-we would conclude that reasonable jurists would not find debatable the district court's determination that [applicant's] general grievances fail to constitute extraordinary circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kenneth v. Martinez
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.