Cobb v. Thaler’s Empirical Analysis
682 F.3d 364 · 2012
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Olano · Williams v. Taylor
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.
“[W]hile the defense surely could have used [the pretrial conversation] in its cross-examination of [Wilhelm], it would not have significantly added to the impeachment ammunition that [Murphy]'s counsel already had.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Murphy v. Davis“was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mejia v. Stephens“was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mejia v. Stephens
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.