Gardner v. Barnett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

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

1. ““This strikes us as an unduly narrow approach. The potential for juror bias is by no means limited to direct or indirect involvement with street gangs. Like any other form of prejudice, gang bias may be born of perception as much as personal experience. Most potential jurors in Illinois (and their families) may have had no direct or indirect involvement with street gangs but many of them would probably hold opinions on the subject.” Gardner, 175 F.3d at 589-90 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 306 Ill. App. 3d 328 - People v. Strain

2. ““Our society takes a very dim and undiscriminating view of street gangs. That jurors may automatically see in gang membership the taint of criminality is a real concern. The Illinois courts have recognized that evidence of gang association may have an unduly suggestive and distorting effect on a jury” Gardner v. Barnett, 175 F.3d 580, 589 (7th Cir. 1999).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 306 Ill. App. 3d 328 - People v. Strain

3. “(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 59 F. Supp. 2d 736 - United States Ex Rel. Blankenship v. Circuit Court of Cook County