United States Shore v. O'Leary’s Empirical Analysis
833 F.2d 663 · 1987
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Townsend v. Sain · Sumner v. Mata · Hoffa v. United States · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'the petitioner reasonably either did not know about ... or could not have presented ... it at an earlier proceeding.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“After reviewing the entire record, we must agree with the district court that the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility was not irrational. The province of credibility determination is reserved for the trial court; its factfinding determination is entitled to a presumption of correctness. Sumner v. Mata, 449 U.S. 539 , 550, 101 S.Ct. 764 , 771, 66 L.Ed.2d 722 (1981). 833 F.2d at 667 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under the habeas corpus statute, ... the state court determination shall be presumed correct. Thus, we find, in the circumstances of this case, no federal evidentiary hearing is mandated under the principles of Townsend.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Resnover v. Pearson
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.