Blake v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis
745 F.3d 977 · 2014
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Coleman v. Thompson · Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Rose v. Lundy · Pace v. Superintendent State Correctional Institution at Graterford
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.
“[G]ood cause turns on whether the petitioner can set forth a reasonable excuse, supported by sufficient evidence, to justify [the failure to exhaust].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An assertion of good cause without evidentiary support will not typically amount to a reasonable excuse justifying a petitioner's failure to exhaust.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[f]actors (2) and (3) of the Rhines test itself — that the “unexhausted claims are potentially meritorious,” and that “there is no indication that the petitioner engaged in intentionally dilatory litigation tactics,” [Rhines, 544 U.S.] at 278, 125 S.Ct. 1528 — are designed, together with the first factor, to ensure that the Rhines stay and abeyance is not, contrary to the district court’s concern, available “in virtually every case.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doe v. Jones
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.