Langston v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
630 F.3d 310 · 2011
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Williams v. Taylor · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Yarborough v. Alvarado · Coffin v. United States
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a conviction based on speculation and surmise alone cannot stand, and courts cannot credit inferences within the realm of possibility when those inferences are unreasonable”); id. (explaining that, where an inference is necessary to support an element of the crime, “it is not enough that the inferences in the government’s favor are permissible”; rather, the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although circumstantial evidence alone can support a conviction, there are times that it amounts to only a reasonable speculation and not to sufficient evidence. ... [W]here the evidence taken in the light most favorable to the prosecution creates only a reasonable speculation that [an element of the crime is met], there is insufficient evidence to satisfy the Jackson standard.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“United States v. Quattrone , 441 F.3d 153 , 169 (2d Cir. 2006).”
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.