In re Moore’s Empirical Analysis
830 F.3d 1268 · 2016
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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 Barefoot v. Estelle · 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States · Welch v. United States · United States v. DiCarlo · Taylor v. United States
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f the district court cannot determine whether the residual clause was used in sentencing and affected the final sentence-if the court cannot tell one way or the other-the district court must deny the § 2255 motion.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]hen we issue an order authorizing a habeas petitioner to file a second or successive § 2255 motion, the district court is to decide the § 2255(h) issues fresh, or in the legal vernacular, de novo .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he district court not only can, but must, determine for itself whether those requirements are met.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.