Messiah v. Duncan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 federal appellate · 19 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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under AEDPA, a federal court may grant a writ of habeas corpus to a state prisoner on a claim that was “adjudicated on the merits” in state court only if it concludes that the adjudication of the claim “(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). We must presume the state court’s factual findings to be correct and may overturn those findings only if the petitioner offers “clear and convincing evidence” of their incorrectness. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (e)(1).”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Brisco v. Ercole · Lewis v. Connecticut Commissioner of Correction

2. “[a]s long as [the] trial judge affords the parties a reasonable opportunity to make their respective records.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Massalay · State v. Williams

3. “As long as a trial judge affords the parties a reasonable opportunity to make their respective records, he may express his Batson ruling on the credibility of a proffered race-neutral explanation in the form of a clear rejection or acceptance of a Batson challenge.”

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