Webster v. Daniels’s Empirical Analysis
784 F.3d 1123 · 2015
Citation profile
13 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1201 (International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act of 1993) · 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 3591 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 3592 · 18 U.S.C. § 3593 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 3596 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 848 · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Lindh v. Murphy · Bailey v. United States · Sanders v. United States · McCleskey v. Zant
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“appears that the remedy by motion [under § 2255 ] is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of [the] detention.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a]ll of these decisions hold, nevertheless, that there must be some kind of structural problem with section 2255 before section 2241 becomes available”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Beason v. Marske · Jahns v. Julian“a reasonable opportunity to obtain a reliable judicial determination of the fundamental legality of his conviction and sentence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Beason v. Marske · Jahns v. Julian
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.