Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 94 F.3d 958 - Graham v. Johnson

Graham v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

94 F.3d 958 · 1996

Citation profile

64
cited by 64 later decisions
January 2015
most recently cited

31 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably Dennis Thurl Dowthitt v. Gary L. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division (2000), Fisher v. Texas (1999)

31 federal appellate ·

320199620002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Teague v. Lane · Rose v. Lundy · Penry v. Lynaugh · Herrera v. Collins · Alexander v. United States

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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A habeas petitioner fails to exhaust state remedies 'when he presents material additional evidentiary support to the federal court that was not presented to the state court.’”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “presented significant evidentiary support for his claims of actual innocence and ineffective assistance of counsel that was never presented to the state courts,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he exhaustion doctrine, generally codified in section 2254(b) & (c), requires that normally a state prisoner's entire federal habeas petition must be dismissed unless the prisoner's state remedies have been exhausted as to all claims raised in the federal petition”
    2 later decisions 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.