Bell v. Norris’s Empirical Analysis
586 F.3d 624 · 2009
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Edwards v. Arizona · Moran v. Burbine · Brewer v. Williams · Fare v. Michael C.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“state court records and appl[y] a presumption that the state trier of fact applied correct standards of federal law to the facts to determine whether factual findings necessarily were implicit in the state courts' conclusions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“intact ruling and record denying relief would be required to make such an inference”
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.