Smith v. Aldridge’s Empirical Analysis
904 F.3d 874 · 2018
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Irvin v. Dowd
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is 'limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“If the applicant has failed to develop the factual basis of a claim in State court proceedings, the court shall not hold an evidentiary hearing on the claim unless the applicant shows that- (A) the claim relies on- (i) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable; or (ii) a factual predicate that could not have been previously discovered through the exercise of due diligence; and (B) the facts underlying the claim would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Simpson v. Carpenter“is 'limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits.' " Smith v. Aldridge , 904 F.3d 874 , 886 (10th Cir. 2018) (quoting Pinholster , 563 U.S. at 181 , 131 S.Ct. 1388 ). As a result, "we can only order evidentiary hearings if the petitioner meets the requirements in both §§ 2254(d) and (e)(2).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Simpson v. Carpenter
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.