Bockting v. Bayer’s Empirical Analysis
418 F.3d 1055 · 2005
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Blakely v. Washington · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Crawford v. Washington · Faretta v. California
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Of course, Blakely relates to the accuracy of sentences, not underlying convictions. [But] I do not see how [this] difference can be material, . . . when the point of Blakely and the entire line of jurisprudence stemming from Apprendi is precisely that sentencing factors must be treated as [the equivalent of] elements of a crime when they increase the defendant's maximum sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Smart v. State
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.