3 Cal. 5th 808 - Briggs v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Douglas v. People of State of California · Pennsylvania v. Finley · Landis v. North American Co. · Ferguson v. Skrupa · Rhines v. Weber
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“; see generally Supreme Court Policies Regarding Cases Arising from Judgments of Death, Policy 3 (2001 ed.) [so designating]; e.g., In re Hawthorne (2005) 35 Cal.4th 40 , 47, 24 Cal.Rptr.3d 189 , 105 P.3d 552 .) Proposition 66 changed the law by declaring a new,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“' "[T]he mere procedure by which jurisdiction is to be exercised may be prescribed by the Legislature, unless ... such regulations should be found to substantially impair the constitutional powers of the courts, or practically defeat their exercise.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The powers of state government are legislative, executive, and judicial. Persons charged with the exercise of one power may not exercise either of the others except as permitted by this Constitution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.