Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 972 F.2d 967 - Stewart v. Nix

Stewart v. Nix’s Empirical Analysis

972 F.2d 967 · 1992

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
3
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 2020

9 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

801992200020102020decided

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. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Estelle v. McGuire · Cupp v. Naughten · Gregory Lumber Co. v. United States · United Families of America v. Kendrick

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

  1. “[a] defendant's absence means little when, as in the present case, the trial court's communication merely ... involves a question of law rather than fact.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “are largely left to trial counsel’s discretion”), Sims’ lawyer testified that Sims agreed to or acquiesced in all the continuances. To the extent the Nebraska courts choose to believe counsel, there is no basis for overturning that decision. 8 . Sims’ filing of the second post-conviction action where he unsuccessfully tried to resurrect his defaulted claims is stark evidence of the validity of Respondent's argument. 9 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[I]t is not the province of a federal habeas court to reexamine state court determinations on state law questions. In conducting habeas review, a federal court is limited to deciding whether a conviction violated the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”
    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.