Howard v. Pung’s Empirical Analysis
862 F.2d 1348 · 1988
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Payton v. New York · Edwards v. Arizona · Townsend v. Sain · Delaware v. Van Arsdall
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a state court evidentiary hearing may be less than full and fair if it yields factual determinations not fairly supported by the record as a whole.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the bar in Stone operates even when the state court has erroneously applied fourth amendment principles,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.