Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 498 U.S. 433 - Burden v. Zant

Burden v. Zant’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
January 2011
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2011 · most notably Carriger v. Stewart (1997), McClain v. State (1996)

31 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 state decisions

560199120002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedBurden v. Zant (from Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Gregg v. Georgia · Sumner v. Mata · Burden v. Zant · Burden v. Zant

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

  1. “habeas court may not disregard this presumption unless it expressly finds that one of the enumerated exceptions to 2254(d) is met and it explains the reasoning in support of that conclusion.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Q: (By Moses): Now, Mr. Dixon, have you been promised anything for your testimony today? A: (By Dixon): Immunity. Q: You've been promised immunity in order to testify? Is that correct? A: Correct. Q: Have you been told that you could get out of jail as soon as you testified? A: Not really. Q: Not really. What have you been told about you getting released from jail? A: I can’t really say. Q: Your Honor, I ask that you direct the witness to answer my question. BY THE COURT: I think he said I can’t say, and I don’t know whether that means his inability to say or he doesn't know or what reason, and I would let counsel for the defendant exhaust it further. Now, if you have a reason, I don’t understand when you say I can’t say. Perhaps, you don’t know. I don’t know what your answer is in that regard. That's not descriptive to me nor to the jury, so please elaborate. A: I just don’t know. BY MR. MOSES: You just don’t know? A: No.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the assumption that Dixon received a grant of transactional immunity, negotiated by Kondritzer and the prosecutor in exchange for Dixon’s testimony against Burden, is without factual support.”
    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.