Lovins v. Parker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate ·

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

1. “[W]e are constrained to conclude that the judicial factfinding in Lovins’s sen-tenqing was unconstitutional and that the remedy Lovins requests is due. We need not instruct the State how to provide this, remedy, only that the remedy must either result in a reduction of Lo-vins’s sentence from twenty-three to twenty years, or in resentencing under a procedure' that does not violate the Sixth Amendment. We afford the State 180 days from the date of this order to ■ initiate the necessary proceedings.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 136 F. Supp. 3d 872 - Means v. Phillips

2. “(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that 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 majority
   e.g. Willie Sanders v. Cindi Curtin

3. “the last reasoned state-court judgment declines to reach the merits because of a petitioner's failure to comply with a state procedural rule”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Clark v. Nagy