Reddy v. Coombe’s Empirical Analysis
846 F.2d 866 · 1988
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2007 · most notably Colon v. Johnson (1998), 854 F. Supp. 944 - Thomas v. Scully (1994)
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Glasser v. United States · Bruton v. United States · Stone v. Powell · B.D. International Discount Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘ask itself whether it believes that the evidence at trial established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.’ Instead, the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. This familiar standard gives full play to the responsibility of the trier of fact fairly to resolve conflicts in the testimony, to weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts. Once a defendant has been found guilty of a crime charged, the fact finder’s role as weigher of the evidence is preserved through a legal conclusion that upon judicial review all of the evidence is to be considered in the light most favorable to the prosecution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Coronado v. Lefevre“[a]cting either alone or with one or more other persons, he commits or attempts to commit robbery... and, in the course of and in furtherance of such crime or of immediate flight therefrom, he, or another participant, if there be any, causes the death of a person other than one of the participants.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Santana v. Kuhlmann“Q When you talked about ripping off John did you talk about if you couldn’t find him maybe seeing if there was another mark? A No, we didn’t talk about it. This other guy just came out of his apartment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.