Nichols v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
69 F.3d 1255 · 1995
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 124 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Whitacre Partnership v. Biosignia, Inc. (2004), Barrientes v. Johnson (2000)
35 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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) · 28 U.S.C. § 455
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Wainwright v. Sykes · Teague v. Lane
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 124 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An attack on a state habeas proceeding does not entitle the petitioner to habeas relief in respect to his conviction, as it is an attack on a proceeding collateral to the detention and not the detention itself.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kinsel v. Cain · Trevino v. Johnson“[I]nfirmities in state habeas proceedings do not constitute grounds for relief in federal court.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“At the least, the ... special issue concerning future dangerousness provide[s] an adequate vehicle for the jury to give effect to this mitigating evidence, placing it within the effective reach of the sentencer, and there is no reasonable likelihood that the jury would have found itself foreclosed from thus considering it. The Supreme Court and this Court have many times so held.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Beazley v. Johnson
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.