Yung v. Walker L’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “it would be an unreasonable interpretation of Waller for a court to deny . . . a request [to permit a family member into a courtroom] if the exclusion of that particular relative, under the specific circumstances at issue, is not necessary to promote the overriding interest.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Robinson v. State · Rodriguez v. Miller

2. “retains broad discretion to hear additional evidence on behalf of the state.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Smith v. Hollins · Hoi Man Yung v. Walker

3. “[A] decision is contrary to clearly established Federal law if it contradicts the governing law or if 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 the Supreme Court. An unreasonable application of federal law is more than an incorrect application, but the petitioner need not show that all reasonable jurists would agree that a state court determination is incorrect in order for it to be unreasonable. Instead, a federal court should review a state court’s interpretation of federal law using a standard of objective reasonableness. The increment of incorrectness beyond error need not be great; otherwise, habeas relief would be limited to state court decisions so far off the mark as to suggest judicial incompetence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 662 F. Supp. 2d 300 - Casillas v. Murray