Cross v. Cunningham’s Empirical Analysis
87 F.3d 586 · 1996
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 2015
3 federal appellate · 4 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · Blackledge v. Perry · Sawyer v. Whitley · Cuyler v. Adams · Reed v. Farley
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“IAD provision at issue here has nothing to do with securing a fair trial, and [petitioner] makes no claim that the alleged IAD violation actually impaired his ability to prepare a defense or to prosecute his appeal.”
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.