Williams v. Lynaugh’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate ·

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

1. “[These] ... claims are totally repetitive with claims made in prior habeas corpus proceedings in the state and federal courts. They have all been denied in the prior federal habeas corpus proceeding, and that denial was affirmed by this Court on [May 9, 1988, Byrne v. Butler, 845 F.2d at 501 ]. These issues constitute successive writs. They have already been decided on the merits, “and the ends of justice would not be served by reaching the merits again.” Moore v. Blackburn, 806 F.2d 560 (5th Cir.1986), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 1988 [ 95 L.Ed.2d 827 ] (1987). There is no ‘color-able claim of factual innocence.’ Kuhlmann v. Wilson, 477 U.S. 436 , 106 S.Ct. 2616 , 2627 [ 91 L.Ed.2d 364 ] (1986).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Byrne v. Butler

2. “[w]e cannot close our eyes to the fact that the granting of certiorari by the Supreme Court in Franklin has at least raised the possibility that what had become accepted as established legal authority may be modified, at least to some extent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. King v. Lynaugh

3. “substantial case on the merits involving a serious legal question.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Selvage v. Lynaugh