Ceja v. Stewart’s Empirical Analysis
97 F.3d 1246 · 1996
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably Donna Marie Walls, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (2002), United States v. Mitchell (2007)
23 federal appellate · 5 district ·
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Wolff v. McDonnell · Coleman v. Thompson · Gregg v. Georgia
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]ll of petitioner's grounds are precluded because petitioner either knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily withheld them on direct appeal or his previous Rule 32 proceeding, or they have been previously determined against petitioner's position on the merits.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“for the reasons stated in [the State's] Response to Petitioner's Petition for Post Conviction Relief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[p]reclusion does not provide a basis for federal courts to apply a procedural bar. By adopting Arizona's mixed arguments of preclusion and waiver with respect to these claims, the state court in Ceja's second Rule 32 proceeding did not clearly base its decision on independent and adequate state grounds.”
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.