Gall v. Parker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

67 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 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 149 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'because ours is a system of law, the arsenal available to a prosecutor to achieve that legitimate goal is limited to arguments rooted in properly introduced evidence and testimony rather than words and tactics designed to inñame passions, air unsubstantiated prosecutorial beliefs, and downplay the legitimacy of a legally recognized defense.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Hanna v. Price · LAUTNER v. Berghuis

2. “(1) the likelihood that the remarks of the prosecutor tended to mislead the jury or prejudice the defendant; (2) whether the remarks were isolated or extensive; (3) whether the remarks were deliberately or accidentally made; and (4) the total strength of the evidence against the defendant.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Broom v. Mitchell · Beuke v. Houk

3. “Principles of comity and finality equally command that a habeas court can not revise a state court’s interpretation of state law, and in particular, instruct that a habeas court accept the interpretation of state law by the highest state court on a petitioner’s direct appeal.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Lakin v. Stine · 603 F. Supp. 2d 960 - Matthews v. Simpson