Georgison v. Donelli’s Empirical Analysis
588 F.3d 145 · 2009
Citation profile
7 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Williams v. Taylor · United States v. Wade · Rhode Island v. Innis · Berkemer v. McCarty
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘the increment of incorrectness beyond error need not be great; otherwise, habeas relief would be limited to state court decisions so far off the mark as to suggest judicial incompetence.’ ” Cornell v. Kirkpatrick, 665 F.3d 369 , 375 (2d Cir.2011) (quoting Georgison v. Donelli, 588 F.3d 145 , 154 (2d Cir.2009)). 20 . A necessary corollary to this point is that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jackson v. Conway“If a suspect is not provided with Miranda warnings, 'the prosecution is barred from using statements obtained during the interrogation to establish its case in chief.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Miranda 's warning requirements, however, apply only to 'custodial interrogation.'”
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.