King v. Ponte’s Empirical Analysis
717 F.2d 635 · 1983
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Agurs · Picard v. Connor · Engle v. Isaac · Houltin v. United States
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“notice of exactly what the defense desired,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]vidence must be reviewed under the Aqurs specific request standard when there is uncertainty about the request.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Chaney v. Brown“to allow [defendant] to examine [his named accomplice's] extrajudicial statements,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Chaney v. Brown
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.