Laxton v. Bartow’s Empirical Analysis
421 F.3d 565 · 2005
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2022
10 federal appellate ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Williams v. Taylor · Kansas v. Hendricks · Foucha v. Louisiana · Kansas v. Crane · Johnson v. Texas
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Crane to vacate the judgment of the Kansas Supreme Court, the absence of more precise language concerning a lack-of-control element, and the Court’s own acknowledgment that bright-line rules are inappropriate in this context, we cannot agree with petitioner’s contention that Crane clearly establishes that the jury must be instructed and specifically find that petitioner has serious difficulty in controlling his behavior.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rose v. Mayberg“when the court reachefs] a conclusion ‘opposite to that reached by [the Supreme] Court on a question of law1 or confronts] ‘facts that are materially indistinguishable from a decision of the Supreme Court and nevertheless arrives at a result different from [its] precedent.’ ”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Burgess v. Watters“a federal habeas court may not issue the writ simply because that court concludes in its independent judgment that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously or incorrectly.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Burgess v. Watters
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.