In re Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
826 F.3d 1343 · 2016
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 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 Atkins v. Virginia · 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States · Welch v. United States · Holland v. Florida · Holland v. Florida
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“limited determination on our part, and, as we have explained before, the district court is to decide the § 2255(h) issues fresh, or in the legal vernacular, de novo”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“relies on a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Bowles
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.