Jackson v. Amaral’s Empirical Analysis
729 F.2d 41 · 1984
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Wainwright v. Sykes · County Court of Ulster Cty. v. Allen · McKaskle v. Wiggins
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is the extent to which the state court relies upon federal rights, cases and legal principles in conducting its review.... The greater the reliance on federal doctrine, the more likely we are to find waiver.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“indicates that the voir dire was not wholly ineffective and suggests that any other juror who doubted his or her ability to render an impartial verdict would have felt comfortable in stepping forward”
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.