Fred D. Ewing, Sr. v. Norris W. McMackin’s Empirical Analysis
799 F.2d 1143 · 1986
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 2008 · most notably Presnell v. Kemp (1988), Hannah v. Conley (1995)
32 federal appellate · 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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Wainwright v. Sykes · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Murray v. Carrier · Rose v. Lundy
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in an extraordinary case, where a constitutional violation has probably resulted in the conviction of one who is actually innocent, a federal habeas corpus court may grant the writ even in the absence of a showing of cause for the procedural default.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Sparks v. Foltz · Thompson v. Rone“[o]ur task in this respect is to distinguish ‘actual’ from ‘legal’ innocence, and determine whether ‘refusal to consider the defaulted claim on federal habeas carries with it the risk of a manifest miscarriage of justice.’ Relief is not warranted where ‘the alleged constitutional error neither precluded the development of true facts nor resulted in the admission of false ones.’ A petitioner fails to persuade a federal court to look past the cause and prejudice test ‘[wjhen the alleged error is unrelated to innocence, and when the defendant was represented by competent counsel, had a full and fair opportunity to press his claim in the state system, and yet failed to do so in violation of a legitimate rule of procedure.’”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bagby v. Sowders“(T)he failure to appeal a state court's denial of a motion for post-conviction relief constitutes a procedural default barring a federal court from reaching the issues raised in such motion absent a demonstration of the cause for and prejudice from such default.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.