Garbutt v. Conway’s Empirical Analysis
668 F.3d 79 · 2012
Citation profile
3 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 · Harris v. Reed · Rausch v. United States · Cavazos v. Smith
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a federal court may not grant the writ of habeas corpus unless the state courts' decision [rejecting the sufficiency claim] was based on 'an unreasonable application of ... clearly established Federal law.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hughes v. Sheahan“may not grant the writ unless [it] conclude[s] that no reasonable court could have held that any reasonable jury could have read the evidence to establish petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hughes v. Sheahan
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.