Evenstad v. Carlson’s Empirical Analysis
470 F.3d 777 · 2006
Citation profile
20
cited by 20 later decisions
4
states following
April 2017
most recently cited
11 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Williams v. Taylor · United States v. Bagley · Kyles v. Whitley · Estelle v. McGuire
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1) (emphasis added). The Supreme Court has stressed that the phrase”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“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. Flowers v. Norris“to point to the [United States] Supreme Court precedent he • thinks the Minnesota state courts acted contrary to or applied unreasonably” and that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Flowers v. Norris
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.