Sessoms v. Grounds’s Empirical Analysis
776 F.3d 615 · 2014
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Williams v. Taylor · Edwards v. Arizona · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Griffin v. California
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to the effect that his father wanted him to have a lawyer present during the interrogation was insufficient to constitute an invocation of [the] defendant's Fifth Amendment right to counsel[,]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Anderson v. Terhune , 516 F.3d 781 , 792 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martinez v. Cate
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.