Magraw v. Roden’s Empirical Analysis
743 F.3d 1 · 2014
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Coleman v. Thompson · Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Darden v. Wainwright
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, [no] rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Roman v. Mitchell · Gomes v. Silva“In habeas jurisdiction, our focus is “the narrow one of due process, and not the broad exercise of supervisory power.” Donnelly v. DeChristoforo, 416 U.S. 637, 642 , 94 S.Ct. 1868 , 40 L.Ed.2d 431 (1974) (internal quotation mark omitted). The clearly established law in this area is exemplified by the Supreme Court’s decision in Darden v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 168, 106 S.Ct. 2464 , 91 L.Ed.2d 144 (1986). Under Darden , the constitutional test is whether the prosecutor’s alleged misconduct “‘so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.’ ” Id. at 181 , 106 S.Ct. 2464 (quoting Donnelly, 416 U.S. at 643 , 94 S.Ct. 1868 ). This is a case-specific inquiry; “[t]here is no precise federal standard governing due process claims based on a prosecutor’s remarks.” Dagley v. Russo, 540 F.3d 8 , 15 n. 3 (1st Cir.2008).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[U]nder Jackson, direct evidence is not necessary to sustain a conviction. . . . This principle is even more firmly established in connection with the deferential approach to state-court decisionmaking that federal habeas review demands.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gomes v. Silva
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.