Foster v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 federal appellate · 2 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(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.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ladd v. Cockrell · Scott v. Cain

2. “(1) “the state court applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in [the Supreme Court’s] cases,” or (2) “the state court confronts a set of facts that are materially indistinguishable from a decision of [the Supreme] Court and nevertheless arrives at a result different from [Supreme Court] precedent.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Garcia v. Quarterman · Summers v. Dretke

3. “`[U]nreasonable' does not mean merely `incorrect': an application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent must be incorrect and unreasonable to warrant federal habeas relief.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Summers v. Dretke · Burgess v. Dretke