Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 699 F.3d 159 - Corby v. Artus

Corby v. Artus’s Empirical Analysis

699 F.3d 159 · 2012

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
February 2021
most recently cited

4 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Williams v. Taylor · Bruton v. United States · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Delaware v. Fensterer

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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The state trial judge was not required to read between the lines of counsel's motion to divine a previously unasserted legal theory.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.