Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 565 U.S. 1 - Cavazos v. Smith

Cavazos v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

565 U.S. 1 · 2011

Citation profile

85
cited by 85 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 5 district · 18 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2264 (§ 107 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Kyles v. Whitley · Harrington v. Richter · Carey v. Musladin · McDaniel v. Brown

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

  1. “A reviewing court may set aside the jury's verdict on the ground of insufficient evidence only if no rational trier of fact could have agreed with the jury.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[C]lemency[ is] a prerogative granted to executive authorities to help ensure that justice is tempered by mercy.... It is not for the Judicial Branch to determine the standards for this discretion. If the clemency power is exercised in either too generous or too stingy a way, that calls for political correctives, not judicial intervention.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “What is more, a federal court may not overturn a state court decision rejecting a sufficiency of the evidence challenge simply because the federal court disagrees with the state court. The federal court instead may do so only if the state court decision was 'objectively unreasonable.'”
    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.