Murillo v. Frank’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “by Roberts or Lilly [v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116 , 119 S.Ct. 1887 , 144 L.Ed.2d 117 (1999)]; it broke from them. That the break takes the form of a return to an older, less flexible but historically better grounded approach does not make it less a break. All constitutional decisions find their ultimate basis in texts adopted long ago — here in the Bill of Rights (1791) and their application to the states via the fourteenth amendment (1868). Judicial rhetoric routinely invokes older norms. This does not mean that there has been no”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Forbes

2. “The three judges in Bockting wrote separately. [One judge] concluded that Crawford applies on collateral review because it did not change the law. [Another judge] concluded that Crawford did change the law, and changed it so dramatically that it established a “watershed rule” that applies retroactively. [A third judge] agreed ... that Crawford changed the law but ... saw [it] as an ordinary development in criminal procedure that like almost all other such changes applies prospectively.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Danforth v. State

3. “The point of Crawford is not that only live testimony is reliable, but that the sixth amendment gives the accused a right to insist on live testimony, whether that demand promotes or frustrates accuracy.. . . This is not an indispensable innocence-protecting decision that must be applied retroactively to criminal prosecutions that have already been finally resolved on direct review.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Drach v. Bruce