Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 2,051 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 Joseph D. Murphy v. State of Ohio.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Joseph D. Murphy v. State of Ohio Anchor | green | “engage in a reasoned assessment of each claim” | 564 |
| 2 | Cullen v. Pinholster | green | “is limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits.” | 260 |
| 3 | Greene v. Fisher | green | “clearly established federal law” | 256 |
| 4 | Bell v. Cone | green | “prevents federal habeas 'retrials” | 240 |
| 5 | Woods v. Donald | green | “to satisfy this high bar, a habeas petitioner is required to 'show that the state court's ruling on the claim being presented in federal court was so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fair…” | 237 |
| 6 | Woods v. Donald | green | “intentionally difficult to meet.” | 187 |
| 7 | Linda Stermer v. Millicent Warren | green | “satisfies the heightened requirements of 2254(d), or if the petitioner's claim was never 'adjudicated on the merits' by a state court, 28 u.s.c. 2254 (d),” | 156 |
| 8 | Cullen v. Pinholster | green | “review under 2254(d)(1) is limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits.” | 151 |
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.