7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 77 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 Hunterson v. Disabato.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hunterson v. Disabato Anchor | green | “f permissible inferences could be drawn either way, the state court decision must stand, as its determination of the facts would not be unreasonable.” | 23 |
| 2 | Cullen v. Pinholster | green | “section 2254(d) applies even where there has been a summary denial.” | 19 |
| 3 | Aycox v. Lytle | green | “e owe deference to the state court's result, even if its reasoning is not expressly stated.” | 9 |
| 4 | Welch v. Workman | green | “we presume the factual findings of the state court are correct unless the petitioner rebuts that presumption by clear and convincing evidence.” | 8 |
| 5 | Bell v. Cone | green | “n unreasonable application is different from an incorrect one.” | 7 |
| 6 | Fahy v. Horn | green | “federal habeas court must afford a state court's factual findings a presumption of correctness and that presumption applies to the factual determinations of state trial and appellate courts.” | 7 |
| 7 | Bell v. Cone | green | “an unreasonable application is different from an incorrect one.” | 4 |
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.