Johnson v. Foster’s Empirical Analysis
786 F.3d 501 · 2015
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
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 Coleman v. Thompson · Murray v. Carrier · Michigan v. Long · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Schlup v. Delo
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] federal habeas court is not the proper body to adjudicate whether a state court correctly interpreted its own procedural rules, even if they are the basis for a procedural default.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martinez v. Ryan“[f]ederalism and comity principles pervade.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jensen v. Pollard
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.