Simpson v. Carpenter’s Empirical Analysis
912 F.3d 542 · 2018
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Slack v. McDaniel · Apprendi v. New Jersey
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“vague, arguable references to a point in the district court proceedings do not preserve the issue on appeal because such perfunctory presentation deprives the trial court of its opportunity to consider and rule on an issue in any detail.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Goode v. Carpenter“[W]hen a litigant fails to raise an issue below in a timely fashion and the court below does not address the merits of the issue, the litigant has not preserved the issue for appellate review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Goode v. Carpenter“This is accomplished by providing the state courts one full opportunity to resolve any constitutional issues by invoking one complete round of the State's established appellate review process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pavatt 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.