Hain v. Gibson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

43 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the admission of a victim's family members’ characterizations and opinions about the crime, the defendant, and the appropriate sentence violates the Eighth Amendment.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Willingham v. Mullin · Turrentine v. Mullin

2. “that the portion of Booth prohibiting family members of a victim from stating ‘characterizations and opinions about the crime, the defendant, and the appropriate sentence’ during the penalty phase of a capital trial survived the holding in Payne and remains valid”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Brown · Underwood v. Royal

3. ““was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1), or “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” Id. § 2254(d)(2). Thus, we may grant the writ if we find the state court arrived at a conclusion opposite to that reached by the Supreme Court on a question of law; decided the case differently than the Supreme Court has on a set of materially indistinguishable facts; or unreasonably applied the governing legal principle to the facts of the prisoner’s case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 45 F. App'x 871 - Meeker v. Saffle