Turner v. Compoy’s Empirical Analysis
827 F.2d 526 · 1987
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably Tacho v. Martinez (1988), Prantil v. California (1988)
37 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 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) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Rose v. Lundy · 23 Cal. 3d 412 - People v. Pope · Lister v. United States · Garrett v. United States · United States v. Birges
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] prisoner need exhaust only one avenue of relief in state court before bringing a habeas petition in federal court. This is true even where alternative avenues of reviewing constitutional issues are still available in state court.”). Smith fairly presented his Cronic claim to the state courts. Moreover, Smith’s Cronic claim is not otherwise barred on adequate and independent state procedural grounds: California Rule of Court 8.500(c) is not an”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“mandate[s] a particular procedure to be used to the exclusion of other avenues of seeking relief ..., presenting an issue to the state's highest court via a statutorily deviating path will not exhaust state remedies.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sager v. Maass“mandate[s] a particular procedure to be used to the exclusion of other avenues of seeking relief”
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.