Stranghoener v. Black’s Empirical Analysis
720 F.2d 1005 · 1983
Citation profile
9 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 2016
9 federal appellate ·
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 Picard v. Connor · Hudson v. Rushen · State v. Reichel · Anderson v. Casscles
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] federal claim is not 'fairly presented' to the state courts when factual allegations significantly affecting the determination of that claim are raised for the first time in federal court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Ordinarily, state prisoners may not obtain habeas corpus relief from a federal court without first exhausting remedies available in state court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gray v. Hopkins“[T]he exhaustion requirement is satisfied only when the federal claim is 'fairly presented' to the state courts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gray v. Hopkins
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.