Richardson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
38 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on 878 So. 2d 1236 - Baker v. State · West Virginia State Department of Tax & Revenue v. Internal Revenue Service · Lopez-Ruiz v. United States · 728 So. 2d 192 - Davis v. State · 781 So. 2d 1040 - Cherry v. State
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the county in which the prisoner is detained.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Since adoption of rule 3.850 and its predecessor, the courts have consistently held that it is inappropriate to collaterally attack a conviction through the process of habeas proceedings because such claims are cognizable under the rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sutton v. State“it is proper to dismiss a habeas petition collaterally attacking [a] conviction when it is clearly discernable that the claims raised are procedurally barred or do not comply with the requirements of rule 3.850.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.