Schawitsch v. Burt’s Empirical Analysis
491 F.3d 798 · 2007
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 2025
5 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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 · Coleman v. Thompson · Manson v. Brathwaite · Lindh v. Murphy · State v. Graves
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1) the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime; 2) the witness's degree of attention; 3) the accuracy of the witness's prior description of the criminal; 4) the level of certainty demonstrated at the confrontation; and 5) the time between the crime and the confrontation. Id. (citing United States v. Williams , 340 F.3d 563 , 567 (8th Cir. 2003) ). In a hospital interview with Sgt. O'Rourke three days after the shooting, Blanton, the shooting victim, stated that he was able to see the shooter at close range:”
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.