In re Williams’s Empirical Analysis
759 F.3d 66 · 2014
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1746 · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miller v. Alabama · Graham v. Florida · Graham v. Florida · Wood v. Milyard · Rosalba Aguirre-Cervantes v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the government's argument that we should refuse certification of [petitioner's] Graham motion goes to the merits of the motion, asking us in effect to make a final determination of whether the holding in Graham will prevail for [petitioner].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A] review of the merits at [the certification] stage is not required.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he court of appeals may authorize the filing of a second or successive application only if it determines that the application makes a prima facie showing that the application satisfies the requirements of this subsection.”
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.