In re Young’s Empirical Analysis
789 F.3d 518 · 2015
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Vasquez v. Hillery · Reyes-Requena v. United States · Bennett v. United States · Flanagan v. Johnson · Kunkle v. Dretke
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the date a petitioner is on notice of the facts which would support a claim, not the date on which the petitioner has in his possession evidence to support his claim”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Solorio v. Muniz · Solorio v. Muniz“[T]his means the date a petitioner is on notice of the facts which would support a claim, not the date on which the petitioner has in his possession evidence to support his claim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. In re Davila · Osborne v. Hall“the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. In re Davila · Osborne v. Hall
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.