Girardin v. Pyle’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Davis v. Alaska · United States v. Young · Rose v. Lundy
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) whether in view of the strength of the evidence against the defendant, the prosecutor’s statements plausibly could have tipped the scales in favor of conviction; (2) whether curative instructions given by the trial judge adequately mitigated the effect on the jury of the improper statements; and (3) the probable effect of the jury’s ability to judge the evidence fairly.” Girardin v. Pyle, 752 F.Supp. 979, 982 (D.Colo.1990), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 329 , 116 L.Ed.2d 269 (1991), citing Hopkinson v. Shillinger, 866 F.2d 1185, 1210 (10th Cir.1989).”
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.