Hutton v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
839 F.3d 486 · 2016
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Coleman v. Thompson · Thomas v. Arn
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“show[ing] by clear and convincing evidence that, but for a constitutional error, no reasonable jury would have found [him] eligible for the death penalty under the applicable state law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jenkins v. Hutton“the jury had not made the necessary finding of the existence of aggravating circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jenkins v. Hutton“gave the jury no guidance as to what to consider as aggravating circumstances”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jenkins v. Hutton
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.