28 F. Supp. 2d 749 - Quartararo v. Hanslmaier’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Bruton v. United States · Chambers v. Mississippi · Irvin v. Dowd · Lindh v. Murphy
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.
“[t]he `Pius case' could have referred to a number of incidents other than the murder, including the theft of the minibike, the driving around and drinking with the others, his knowledge that Peter had confessed, the rampant rumors in the community, et cetera.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“was an accusation of Petitioner. This type of inferential reasoning is not the sort of direct and immediate confrontation that exists in any of the cases Petitioner cites in support of his position. The line of reasoning from”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“78 Q After that was something else again said to him? Just yes or no. 79 A Yes, sir. 80 Q And after that was said to him, did he say something else in response to that? 81 A Yes, he did. 82 Q What did he say? 83 A He said,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.