In re Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
814 F.3d 1259 · 2016
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Slack v. McDaniel · Crawford v. Washington · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Ring v. Arizona
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]his Court necessarily must apply § 2244(b)(2) under a tight time limit in all cases, since the statute expressly requires us to resolve this application within 30 days, no matter the case .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. In re Williams
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.