Edgemon v. Al Lockhart’s Empirical Analysis
768 F.2d 252 · 1985
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently February 2009 · most notably Amos v. State of Minnesota (1988), McConico v. Alabama (1990)
10 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Wainwright v. Sykes · Townsend v. Sain · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Blanton v. General Electric Credit Corp.
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We have cautioned that post-trial inquiries into a juror's state of mind are not favored, and that a high standard of proof is required when an allegation of juror incompetence is made. A petitioner is entitled to a hearing only if he produces substantial evidence of incompetence such as proof of an adjudication of insanity or mental incompetence made shortly before or after trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. AWANA v. State“[i]f, after an evidentiary hearing, [petitioner] is unable to show * * * [systematic exclusion of blacks from juries], we would agree that his petition should be dismissed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Brown v. Al Lockhart“show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Reasoner v. Rode
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.