In re Williams’s Empirical Analysis
826 F.3d 1351 · 2016
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3559 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Teague v. Lane · 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States · Welch v. United States · United States v. Bradley · United States v. Matchett
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) 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 Williams“that he would 'benefit' from Johnson , since he received a concurrent mandatory life sentence on Count 1 that ... is unaffected by Johnson”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Williams“made a prima facie showing under Johnson as to Count 3”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.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.