Toles v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
888 F.2d 95 · 1989
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently September 2006 · most notably Hill v. Jones (1996), Isaacs v. Head (2002)
22 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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)
Relies on Wainwright v. Sykes · Teague v. Lane · Murray v. Carrier · Engle v. Isaac · Harris v. Reed
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“ha[s] no constitutional right to coram nobis counsel, see Pennsylvania v. Finley , 481 U.S. 551 , 555 , 107 S.Ct. 1990 , 1993 , 95 L.Ed.2d 539 (1987), he cannot excuse a procedural default based upon ineffective assistance rendered by that counsel. See [ Wainwright v.] Torna , 455 U.S. [586,] 587-88, 102 S.Ct. [1300,] 1301-02, [ 71 L.Ed.2d 475 (1982)].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“procedurally barred from raising a federal constitutional claim in state court is also barred from raising the claim in a federal habeas petition unless he can show cause for and actual prejudice from making the default.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Since [petitioner] had no constitutional right to coram nobis counsel, he cannot excuse a procedural default based upon ineffective assistance rendered by that counsel”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Johnson v. Dugger
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.