Loher v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
825 F.3d 1103 · 2016
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (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 · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Olano
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“review [of] the district court's determination of the appropriate remedy for a constitutional violation on a habeas petition [is] for abuse of discretion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Troiano v. U.S.“contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established” federal law, or (2) the state court decision was based on an”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Loher.
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.