Poyson v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis
711 F.3d 1087 · 2013
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Lockett v. Ohio · Picard v. Connor · Eddings v. Oklahoma · Woodson v. North Carolina
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.
“Their failure to adequately investigate and substantiate [evidence that Petitioner was exposed to drugs and alcohol in útero ] profoundly prejudiced Petitioner. Adequate explanation during the pre-sentence hearing of the effect of FASD on Petitioner’s brain would likely have convinced the trial court'that Petitioner had a lesser degree of culpability.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Poyson v. Ryan · Poyson v. Ryan“The argument is made that the defendant was subjected to alcohol abuse and drug abuse. Other than very vague allegations that he has used alcohol in the past or has used drugs in the past, other than a fairly vague assertion that he was subject to some sort of effect of drugs and/or alcohol at the time, that these offenses were committed, I really find very little to support the allegation that the defendant has a significant alcohol and/or drug abuse, and again, going back to the methodical steps that were taken to murder three people to get a vehicle to get out of Golden Valley, it’s very difficult for me to conclude that the defendant’s ability to engage in goal-oriented behavior was, in any way, impaired at the time of the commission of these offenses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Poyson v. Ryan“[T]he defendant had some mental health and psychological issues. I think ... the defense has established that there were certain ... personality disorders that the defendant, in fact, may have been suffering from. The Court, however, does not find that they rise to the level of being a mitigating factor because I am unable to draw any connection whatsoever with such personality disorders and the commission of these offenses. 4”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Poyson v. Ryan
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.