Rios v. Mazzuca’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Woodford Warden v. Garceau · Willie Lee Miles v. Kw Prunty Attorney General of the State of California · Calderon v. United States District Court for the Central District of California · Kevin Smith v. Michael McGinnis Superintendent, Southport Correctional Facility · Smith-Haynie v. District of Columbia
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“^ particularized description of how [his] condition adversely affected [his] capacity to function generally or in relationship to the pursuit of [his] rights.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[petitioner's] conduct [ ] indicates that he was, to some extent, capable of investigating and pursuing legal avenues”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.