Nasby v. McDaniel’s Empirical Analysis
853 F.3d 1049 · 2017
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Massiah v. United States · Cullen v. Pinholster · Cullen v. Pinholster · Cullen v. Pinholster
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.
“the trial court's finding that the foreperson was not actually biased ... was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts and was contrary to the foreperson's testimony expressing actual and explicit bias.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Scott v. Arnold“obtain and review the relevant portions of the state court record,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Valdez v. Montgomery“independently [review] the basis for the state court's decision,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Valdez v. Montgomery
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.