Howard v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
815 F.2d 1429 · 1987
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably Andrews v. Collins (1994), Anderson v. Butler (1988)
12 federal appellate · 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Rose v. Lundy · Ake v. Oklahoma · Westbrook v. Zant
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there is either an absence of available state corrective process or the existence of circumstances rendering such process ineffective to protect the right of the prisoner.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Futility of exhaustion is recognized in this circuit as an exception to the exhaustion requirement of § 2254(b).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“insanity defense initially, knowing that he might withdraw the defense at a later time.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Williams v. Bowersox
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.