Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 703 F.3d 1301 - In re Moss

In re Moss’s Empirical Analysis

703 F.3d 1301 · 2013

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
3
states following
September 2023
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Atkins v. Virginia · Penry v. Lynaugh · Melvin Tyler v. Burl Cain Warden · Graham v. Florida · Jordan v. Secretary

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

  1. “Any determination that the district court makes about whether [Cannon] has satisfied the requirements for filing a second or successive motion, and any determination it makes on the merits, if it reaches the merits, is subject to review on appeal from a final judgment or order if an appeal is filed.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “limited determination on our part, and, as we have explained before, the district court is to decide the § 2255(h) issues fresh, or in the legal vernacular, de novo”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.