Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 903 F.2d 1321 - Beachum v. Tansy

Beachum v. Tansy’s Empirical Analysis

903 F.2d 1321 · 1990

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
2
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

35 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently February 2015 · most notably Ouber v. Guarino (2002), Tapia v. Tansy (1991)

35 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

360199020002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Chapman v. State of California · Batson v. Kentucky · In the Matter of Samuel Winship

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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “must be substantial; that is, it must do more than raise a mere suspicion of guilt.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A conviction can constitutionally stand only if, after viewing all of the evidence presented at the trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier-of-fact could have found the essential elements of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Due process does not require the rote performance of futile exercises.”
    3 later decisions 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.