Jones v. Clarke’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “a federal court may not grant habeas relief unless the adjudication 'resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States;' or 'resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.' " Jones v. Clarke , 783 F.3d 987 , 991 (4th Cir. 2015) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d) ). The Supreme Court has consistently reminded us that this standard is "difficult to meet and highly deferential,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Porter v. Zook

2. “an unreasonable application of federal law differs from an incorrect application of federal law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Porter v. Zook

3. “demands that state-court decisions be given the benefit of the doubt.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Porter v. Zook