Cook v. Al Lockhart’s Empirical Analysis
878 F.2d 220 · 1989
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 2000
8 federal appellate ·
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 Sanders v. United States · Kuhlmann v. Wilson · Williams v. Al Lockhart · Cook v. State · Cook v. State
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.
“To show cause in the context of successive or abusive claims, petitioner must show that the claims are 'based on facts or legal theories of which he had no knowledge when prosecuting his prior habeas petition.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bannister v. Delo“'assert[ed] no other facts or law unknown at the time of the first petition.'”
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.