Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 824 F.2d 847 - Moore v. Kemp

Moore v. Kemp’s Empirical Analysis

824 F.2d 847 · 1987

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
March 1993
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Morrissey v. Brewer · Gideon v. Wainwright · United States v. Wade

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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “ends of justice” will demand consideration of the merits of claims only where there is”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[I]f a prisoner deliberately withholds one or two grounds for federal collateral relief at the time of filing his first application, in the hope of being granted five hearings rather than one or for some other such reason, he may be deemed to have waived his right to a hearing on a second application presenting the withheld ground_ Nothing in the tradi tions of habeas corpus requires the federal courts to tolerate piecemeal litigation, or to entertain collateral proceedings whose only purpose is to vex, harass, or delay.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A second or successive petition may be dismissed if the judge finds that it fails to allege new or different grounds for relief and the prior determination was on the merits, or, if new or different grounds are alleged, the judge finds that the failure of the petitioner to assert those grounds in a prior petition constituted abuse of the writ.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.