Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 615 F.3d 421 - Simpson v. Jackson

Simpson v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

615 F.3d 421 · 2010

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Appellate journey

Relationships

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

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Williams v. Taylor · Edwards v. Arizona · Rhode Island v. Innis

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

  1. “WALKER: [D]o you follow what I’m sayin’? That’s ... i-i-if you’re telling me the truth, then you won’t have a problem with the test. If you’re lying, then, uh, yea, if I was lying, I probably would, I’d probably get an attorney, I probably wouldn’t take the test. SIMPSON: Oh. WALKER: Yea, well, that’s me. But that’s a decision that, yea, you know, you have to make. This part of the form is wordy and is — is lengthy. What this says is, that you are giving me permission to give you the exam.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[Ejven in the June 20th statement, Simpson still maintained that he had not been involved in the planning of the arson or in making the Molotov cocktails, and had no intent to kill anyone. Thus, to prove that Simpson acted with the purpose of causing the death of another, the State needed something more than Simpson’s own admissions. Creatively, the State turned to Simpson’s April denials to prove this element.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “1. [A] sheriffs deputy at the local jail testified that he overheard Simpson ask “why didn’t they charge the bitch too. It was her idea to start the fire.”; and 2. [A]n inmate from a cell next to Simpson testified that Simpson told him that there were three people involved in the fire, he was one of them, and that they used Molotov cocktails.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.