Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 474 F.3d 236 - Benge v. Johnson

Benge v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

474 F.3d 236 · 2007

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
June 2021
most recently cited

20 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Getsy v. Mitchell (2007), Ivory v. Jackson (2007)

20 federal appellate ·

230200720102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Williams v. Taylor · Coleman v. Thompson · Giglio v. United States

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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to a judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless 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....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Had Benge impulsively and fatally hit his common law wife in the head with a tire iron in an abhorrent act of extreme domestic violence, instead of killing her to gain access to her ATM card, as the prosecution alleged and the jury supposedly found, would his conduct somehow be less heinous and reprehensible? Such a murder would be at least as revolting as the one that occurred here, yet as far as I can tell, would have presented none of the aggravating factors required for a death sentence under Ohio law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “The common definition of the phrase 'preponderance of the evidence,’ as found in law treatises and standard jury instructions, is evidence that is of greater weight, on balance, than that offered in opposition to it.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.