Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 834 F.3d 808 - King v. Pfister

King v. Pfister’s Empirical Analysis

834 F.3d 808 · 2016

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
September 2022
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Estelle v. McGuire · Withrow v. Larkin · William O'sullivan v. Darren Boerckel · Rompilla v. Beard

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is well-established that on habeas review, a federal court cannot disagree with a state court's resolution of an issue of state law.”
    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.