Guizar v. Estelle’s Empirical Analysis
843 F.2d 371 · 1988
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently May 2007 · most notably Michael Anthony v. Steven Cambra, Jr., Warden (2000), Charles Keating v. Robert Hood (1999)
29 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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
Relies on Rose v. Lundy · Anderson v. Harless · Tamapua v. Shimoda · Szeto v. Rushen
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] district court must dismiss habeas corpus petitions containing exhausted and unexhausted claims.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“should have the option of either resubmitting their petitions with only exhausted claims, or exhausting the remainder of their claims in state court and then filing new petitions.... [If petitioner] resubmit[s] his petition with only the exhausted claims,... the district court may accept it nunc pro tunc and reinstate its opinion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]ecause the substance of the two claims differs, we cannot consider the Miranda claim to have been 'fairly presented' to the state courts....”
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.