Reiger v. Christensen’s Empirical Analysis
789 F.2d 1425 · 1986
Citation profile
91 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 114 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Sanders v. Ratelle (1994), Iaea v. Sunn (1986)
91 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
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)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · United States v. Agurs · Wainwright v. Sykes · Townsend v. Sain
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 114 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[the] issue is not whether introduction of [the evidence] violated state law evidentiary principles, but whether the trial court committed an error which rendered the trial so arbitrary and fundamentally unfair that it violated federal due process.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We may not affirm a district court's denial of a writ of habeas corpus unless the court either held an evidentiary hearing, or the record shows that the district court independently reviewed the relevant portions of the state court record.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Hence, a petitioner who raises only questions of fact has the burden of providing the district court with the relevant portions of the state court record, or of showing his inability to do so.”
2 later decisions 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.