Coleman v. Zant’s Empirical Analysis
708 F.2d 541 · 1983
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably Coleman v. Kemp (1985), Hall v. State (1999)
35 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
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 Townsend v. Sain · Fay v. Noia · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Irvin v. Dowd · Brown v. Allen
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`To find the existence of actual prejudice, two basic prerequisites must be satisfied. First, it must be shown that one or more jurors who decided the case entertained an opinion, before hearing the evidence adduced at trial, that the defendant was guilty. Irvin v. Dowd , 366 U.S. [717,] 727, 81 S.Ct. [1639,] 1645, [ 6 L.Ed.2d 751 , 758-59 (1961)]. Second, these jurors, it must be determined, could not have laid aside these preformed opinions and "render[ed] a verdict based on the evidence presented in court." Irvin v. Dowd , 366 U.S. at 723 , 81 S.Ct. at 1643 [ 6 L.Ed.2d at 756 ].'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“While the district court generally has discretion to grant or deny discovery requests under Rule 6 [of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases under Section 2254], a court's blanket denial of discovery is an abuse of discretion if discovery is `indispensable to a fair, rounded, development of the material facts.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. East v. Scott · Knight v. Dugger“render[ed] a verdict based on the evidence presented in court.”
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.