Coleman v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
566 U.S. 650 · 2012
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Renico v. Lett · Cavazos v. Smith · Commonwealth v. McFarland · Commonwealth v. Montalvo
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“face a high bar in federal habeas proceedings.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[u]nder Jackson , federal courts must look to state law for the substantive elements of the criminal offense, but the minimum amount of evidence that the Due Process Clause requires to prove the offense is purely a matter of federal law.”
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.