Wade v. Mantello’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In any given criminal case the trial judge is called upon to make dozens, sometimes hundreds, of decisions concerning the admissibility of evidence. As we reaffirmed earlier this Term, the Constitution leaves to the judges who must make these decisions “wide latitude” to exclude evidence that is “repetitive ..., only marginally relevant” or poses an undue risk of “harassment, prejudice, [or] confusion of the issues.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 303 F. Supp. 2d 59 - Hunter v. Murphy · Horton v. Litscher

2. “(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. Scrimo v. Lee · Hoi Man Yung v. Walker

3. “[t]he potential for speculation into theories of third-party culpability to open the door to tangential testimony raises serious concerns.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. U.S. v. Hendricks · United States v. Hendricks