McQuillion v. Duncan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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 117 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “shall set a release date unless it determines that the gravity of the current convicted offense or offenses, or the timing and gravity of current or past convicted offense or offenses, is such that consideration of the public safety re quires a more lengthy period of incarceration for this individual, and that a parole date, therefore, cannot be fixed at this meeting.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Miller v. Oregon Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision · 444 F. Supp. 2d 1049 - Sanchez v. Kane

2. “application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim 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.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Rosas v. Nielsen · 431 F. Supp. 2d 1038 - Martin v. Marshall

3. “uses mandatory language, `creat[ing] a presumption that ... release will be granted' ... unless certain designated findings are made, and thereby gives rise to a constitutional liberty interest.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Carver v. Lehman · 745 F. Supp. 2d 244 - Robles v. Dennison