green
Positive treatment
4.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 2004 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2004
2015
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Alba v. Quarterman
See Busby v. Dretke, 359 F.3d 708, 720 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1087 , 124 S.Ct. 2812 , 159 L.Ed.2d 249 (2004).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bartee v. Quarterman
(2×)
See Busby v. Dretke, 359 F.3d 708, 719 (5th Cir.) (holding the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion in Ex parte Gardner, 959 S.W.2d 189, 199 (Tex.Crim.App.1996) modified on motion for rehearing on February 2, 1998, to recognize this new procedural default rule, “firmly entrenched” that procedural default rule on that date), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1087 , 124 S.Ct. 2812 , 159 L.Ed.2d 249 (2004); Finley v. Johnson, 243 F.3d 215, 219 (5th Cir.2001) (holding a federal habeas petitioner procedurally defaulted on an unexhausted newly discovered evidence theory supporting a Brady claim by fa…
discussed
Cited "see"
Watts v. Quarterman
See Busby v. Dretke, 359 F.3d 708, 719 (5th Cir.2004), (holding the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion in Ex parte Gardner, 959 S.W.2d 189, 199 (Tex.Crim.App.1996) modified on motion for rehearing on February 2, 1998, to recognize this new procedural default rule, “firmly entrenched” that procedural default rule on that date), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1087 , 124 S.Ct. 2812 , 159 L.Ed.2d 249 (2004); Finley v. Johnson, 243 F.3d 215, 219 (5th Cir.2001) (holding a federal habeas petitioner procedurally defaulted on an unexhausted newly discovered evidence theory supporting a Brady claim …
discussed
Cited "see"
Gutierrez v. Dretke
See Busby v. Dretke, 359 F.3d 708, 719 (5th Cir. 2004) (holding the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion in Ex parte Gardner, modified on motion for rehearing on February 2, 1998, furnishes the foundation for this new state procedural rule), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1087 , 124 S.Ct. 2812 , 159 L.Ed.2d 249 (2004).
discussed
Cited "see"
Prieto v. Dretke
See Busby v. Dretke, 359 F.3d 708, 719 (5th Cir.2004), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1087 , 124 S.Ct. 2812 , 159 L.Ed.2d 249 (2004), (holding the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinion in Ex parte Gardner, 959 S.W.2d 189, 199 (Tex.Crim.App.1996) modified on motion for rehearing on February 2, 1998, to recognize this new procedural default rule, “firmly entrenched” that procedural default rule on that date).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Felix Rocha v. Rick Thaler, Director
Accord Williams v. Thaler, 602 F.3d 291, 305-07 (5th Cir.2010) (concluding that an unexhausted successive habeas petition the merits of which the CCA would refuse to consider on the ground that it did not satisfy the requirements of § 5(a)(3) was procedurally defaulted and precluded from merits review in federal court), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 506 , 178 L.Ed.2d 376 , 2010 WL 2917636 (Nov. 1, 2010); Nobles, 127 F.3d at 422 (same); see also Busby v. Dretke, 359 F.3d 708, 724 (5th Cir.) (treating a petition that could not satisfy any of the three subsections of § 5(a) as procedurally …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sparkman v. State
See also Busby v. Dretke, 359 F.3d 708, 716 (5th Cir.) (recognizing, in a habeas corpus case, the “prevailing view” that “there is no constitutional violation” in reading detainee’s outgoing mail), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1087 , 124 S.Ct. 2812 , 159 L.Ed.2d 249 (2004); Stow v. Grimaldi, 993 F.2d 1002, 1004 (1st Cir.1993) (holding that a “New Hampshire State Prison practice of requiring non-privileged outgoing mail to be submitted for inspection in unsealed envelopes” does not violate prisoners’ constitutional rights); Smith v. Delo, 995 F.2d 827, 832 (8th Cir.1993) (holding pris…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Busby
v.
Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
v.
Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
03-9218.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 7, 2004.
Cited by 24 opinions | Published
BUSBY
v.
DRETKE, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION.
No. 03-9218.
Supreme Court of United States.
June 7, 2004.
1
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 359 F. 3d 708.