4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 152 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from McFarland v. Scott.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | McFarland v. Scott Anchor | green | “federal courts are authorized to dismiss summarily any habeas petition that appears legally insufficient on its face.” | 92 |
| 2 | Lonchar v. Thomas | green | “a district court is authorized to dismiss a habeas petition summarily when it plainly appears from the face of the petition and any exhibits annexed to it that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” | 26 |
| 3 | Paul E. Bettencourt, M.D. v. Board of Registration in Medicine of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts | green | “(1) the state proceedings are judicial (as opposed to legislative) in nature; (2) they implicate important state interests; and (3) they provide an adequate opportunity to raise federal constitutional challenges.” | 20 |
| 4 | Bramson v. Winn | green | “the 2254 rules specifically state that they may be applied by the district court to other habeas petitions.” | 14 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.