Thomas v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
849 F.3d 669 · 2017
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2255 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Padilla v. Kentucky · Harrington v. Richter
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Beyond mere speculation, Thomas provides no evidence that the Government withheld evidence that it was obligated to disclose. Bald assertions and conclusory allegations do not provide sufficient ground to warrant requiring the government to respond to discovery or to require an evidentiary hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Roseberry v. Ryan“[a] spillover of evidence between counts does not require severance unless there is 'substantial,' 'undue,' or 'compelling' prejudice.”
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.