Camillo v. Armontrout’s Empirical Analysis
938 F.2d 879 · 1991
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Teague v. Lane · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Oyler v. Boles · Kentucky v. Stincer · Specht v. Patterson
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Procedural Default.” 8 . See N.Y. Penal Law § 70.06 . 9 . The Court is cognizant that the question of whether or not the trial court complied with New York’s statutory law”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Larweth v. Conway
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.