Pizzuti v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2255 · 18 U.S.C. § 2517 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3500 · 18 U.S.C. § 894 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Coleman v. Thompson · Giglio v. United States · Kyles v. Whitley
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.
“Generalized statements regarding the possibility of the existence of discoverable material cannot yield 'good cause.' The court may, in its discretion, deny discovery where the petitioner provides no specific evidence that the requested discovery would support his or her habeas corpus petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Abdi v. Duke“Renis v. Thomas , No. 02-CV-9256 (DAB) (RLE), 2003 WL 22358799 , at (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 16, 2003).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Abdi v. Duke“actually advance [their] claims of error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Abdi v. Duke
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.