U.S. v. Allen’s Empirical Analysis
918 F.3d 457 · 2019
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Michel v. State of Louisiana Poret · Wilbert Herring v. W. J. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections · Correale v. United States · United States v. Pierce
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A § 2255 motion requires an evidentiary hearing unless either (1) the movant's claims are clearly frivolous or based upon unsupported generalizations, or (2) the movant would not be entitled to relief as a matter of law, even if his factual assertions were true.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We review the district court's denial of § 2255 relief de novo , and its denial of an evidentiary hearing for abuse of discretion.”
1 later decision 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.