Garcia v. Long’s Empirical Analysis
808 F.3d 771 · 2015
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Kotteakos v. United States · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Arizona v. Fulminante
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A confession is like no other evidence; it may be the most damaging evidence that can be admitted against a defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martinez v. Cate“[e]xercis[e] extreme caution ... before determining that the admission of a confession at trial was harmless.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martinez v. Cate“give considerable deference to the state courts, 'AEDPA deference is not a rubber stamp.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Stevens v. Carlin
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.