Frazier v. Varga’s Empirical Analysis
843 F.3d 258 · 2016
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Estelle v. Gamble · Erickson v. Pardus · 132 S. Ct. 1309 - Martinez v. Ryan · Martinez v. Ryan
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Regardless of whether a habeas claim was fairly presented or defaulted in the state courts, if an argument was not presented to the federal district court, it is forfeited in this court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]rguments in a federal habeas petition which were not raised in the district court are not properly raised for the first time on appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Felton v. Bartow
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.