Gibbons v. Savage’s Empirical Analysis
555 F.3d 112 · 2009
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 3 district · 12 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Faretta v. California · Gideon v. Wainwright · Arizona v. Fulminante · Neder 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“nothing of significance happened during the part of the session that took place in the courtroom”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'ensur[ing] a fair trial, ... remind[ing] the prosecutor and judge of their responsibility to the accused and the importance of their functions, ... encourag[ing] witnesses to come forward, ... discourag[ing] perjury,' ... promot[ing] confidence in the judiciary,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he party seeking to close the hearing must advance an overriding interest that is likely to be prejudiced, the closure must be no broader than necessary to protect that interest, the trial, court must consider reasonable alternatives to closing the proceeding, and it must make findings adequate to support the closure.”
2 later decisions 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.