Johnson v. Bett’s Empirical Analysis
349 F.3d 1030 · 2003
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Williams v. Taylor · Bruton v. United States · Townsend v. Sain · Chambers v. Mississippi
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“if the state court confronts facts that are materially indistinguishable from a relevant Supreme Court precedent and arrives at a result opposite to [the Supreme Court's decision].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Owens v. Frank“was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Owens v. Frank“), 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), habeas relief may be granted only if the state court's adjudication on the merits of a claim”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Owens v. Frank
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.