Boria v. Keane’s Empirical Analysis
90 F.3d 36 · 1996
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2016 · most notably Lindh v. Murphy (1997), Lindh v. Murphy (1996)
23 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 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
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Von Moltke v. Gillies · Boria v. Keane
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jeffries v. Wood · Archie v. Hobbs“'deeply rooted’ in our jurisprudence that absent some clear signal from Congress, a statute will not apply retroactively.” Id. at 38 (quoting Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 , -, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497 , 128 L.Ed.2d 229 (1994)). 8 . References to”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A person is guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree when he knowingly and unlawfully possesses: (1) a narcotic drug with intent to sell it....” 2 . Because the Court recommends that Robinson’s petition be dismissed on the merits, the Court need not address the effect, if any, of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ( Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214), on non-capital case habeas corpus petitions, such as Robinson's, filed and pending before the Act's April 24, 1996 enactment. A Second Circuit panel has decided that the Antiterrorism Act "does not apply retroactively to habeas corpus petitions not involving death sentences filed prior to the statute’s enactment.”
3 later decisions 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.