Jones v. Hess’s Empirical Analysis
681 F.2d 688 · 1982
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably Osborn v. Shillinger (1988), Jones v. Wj Estelle (1983)
32 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Goldberg v. Kelly · Rose v. Lundy · Picard v. Connor · In the Matters of Lee Roy Murchison and John Whites · Whiteley v. Warden, Wyoming State Penitentiary
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that were not before the state courts will not render a petitioner's claim unexhausted. Id. At this point in the habeas process we have no reason to believe that Mr. Duncan seeks to introduce new evidence in support of his prosecutorial vindictiveness claim. His habeas petition relies solely on the state trial record, and he has not sought a federal evidentiary hearing. Thus, we conclude on the record before us that Mr. Duncan has exhausted his state remedies in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2254(c) by”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Generally an appellate court must apply the law in effect at the time it renders its decision where a change in law occurs while a case is on direct appeal, although there may well be an exception to this rule to prevent manifest injustice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“in a significantly different and stronger posture than it was when the state courts considered it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Grant v. Royal
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.