Toney v. Gammon’s Empirical Analysis
79 F.3d 693 · 1996
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Jones v. Wood (1997), Gaines-Tabb v. ICI Explosives, USA, Inc. (1998)
19 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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
Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Murray v. Carrier · Estelle v. McGuire · Picard v. Connor · 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a properly limited plain error review by a state court does not cure a procedural default.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Given the nature of Toney’s allegations, we conclude that Toney has shown good cause for discovery under Rule 6. Toney has claimed throughout his postconviction proceedings that he is innocent of the crime and that his counsel was ineffective for failing to pursue his claim of mistaken identity or to obtain state’s evidence so as to conduct scientific examinations. In order to prove the prejudice prong of his ineffective assistance claim, Toney is entitled to have access to this evidence through discovery. The district court abused its discretion in denying his discovery requests.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jones v. Wood“[g]enerally, a habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing in federal court if the petition alleges sufficient grounds for release, relevant facts are in dispute, and the state courts did not hold a full and fair evidentiary hearing,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mack v. Caspari
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.