Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 787 F.2d 816 - Smart v. Scully

Smart v. Scully’s Empirical Analysis

787 F.2d 816 · 1986

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
August 2005
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently August 2005

5 federal appellate · 1 district ·

90198619902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Wainwright v. Sykes · Fay v. Noia · United States v. Frady · Engle v. Isaac · Reed v. Ross

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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “while not in compliance with state procedure, notified the court as to his constitutional claim and gave the state court a clear opportunity to address his claim or allow him to replead,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[h]is noncompliance with a threshold requirement of post-conviction relief caused him to suffer dismissal of his motion without providing any opportunity for a favorable outcome.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “could preserve an opportunity for success at the state level while embedding in the state record a basis for possible future habeas relief.”
    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.