Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 722 F.2d 290 - Houston v. Mintzes

Houston v. Mintzes’s Empirical Analysis

722 F.2d 290 · 1983

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
March 2000
most recently cited

13 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently March 2000

13 federal appellate ·

90198319902000decided

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. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Blanton v. General Electric Credit Corp. · Lyon v. California · Kelsaw v. Oregon · Johnson v. Bennett · Reece v. Craven

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

  1. “an appeal from a ‘final order’ cannot be had unless a certificate of probable cause is issued, and in view of the fact that Houston here appeals, not from issues decided by the district court but from the final order of the district court, the grant of the certificate of probable cause by the district court, in spite of its purported limiting provision, brings before us the final judgment for review in all respects.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[u]nless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “such limitation has no legal effect in that, a certificate having been issued by the district court, the final judgment denying habeas relief is before us for review, and ... we may accordingly consider all grounds raised by petitioner-appellant to the same extent as if the district court had specifically certified as to all such grounds.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.