Raby v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
907 F.3d 880 · 2018
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Coleman v. Thompson · Gonzalez v. Crosby · 132 S. Ct. 1309 - Martinez v. Ryan · Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A 'change in decisional law after entry of judgment does not constitute extraordinary circumstances and is not alone grounds for relief from a final judgment.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Crutsinger v. Davis
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.