Wellons v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
558 U.S. 220 · 2010
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Smith v. Phillips · Michael Wayne Williams v. John Taylor Warden · Schriro v. Landrigan · Cone v. Bell · Brooks v. City of San Mateo
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“AEDPA does not require such a crabbed and illogical” interpretation. See Wellons v. Hall, - U.S. -, n. 3, 130 S.Ct. 727 , 730 n. 3, 175 L.Ed.2d 684 (2010) (per curiam). 12 . See Chandler v. United States, 218 F.3d 1305 , 1315 n. 15 (11th Cir.2000) (en banc) (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“From beginning to end, judicial proceedings conducted for the purpose of deciding whether a defendant shall [be sentenced to life in prison for murder] must be conducted with dignity and respect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smith v. State
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.