Malvo v. Mathena’s Empirical Analysis
893 F.3d 265 · 2018
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on North Carolina v. Alford · Brady v. United States · Teague v. Lane · Roper Superintendent Potosi Correctional Center v. Simmons · United States v. Broce
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Miller requires that before sentencing a juvenile to life without parole , the sentencing judge [must] take into account 'how children are different, and how those differences counsel against irrevocably sentencing them to a lifetime in prison.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Even if a court considers a child's age before sentencing him or her to a lifetime in prison, that sentence still violates the Eighth Amendment for a child whose crime reflects 'unfortunate yet transient immaturity.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Gulley“[t]he Eighth Amendment does not foreclose the possibility that persons convicted of nonhomicide crimes committed before adulthood will remain behind bars for life,”
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.