Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 915 F.2d 1396 - McKenzie v. Risley

McKenzie v. Risley’s Empirical Analysis

915 F.2d 1396 · 1990

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
August 2011
most recently cited

9 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently August 2011

9 federal appellate ·

120199020002010decided

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

Relies on Carnegie v. United States · Scharffe v. Perkins · In re Disbarment of Johnson · Gozlon-Peretz v. United States · Kruso v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp.

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

  1. “Also on cross examination, Mr. Anderson was asked specifically whether he discussed with Judge Nelson a number of particular matters relating to the case and the work he had done on it. These included the evidence that Lana Harding was raped, the evidence that the victim was tortured, Mr. McKenzie’s psychiatric defenses, the change of venue and the sentiment of the local community about the case, the brutality of the murder and discussions he had had with witnesses who had viewed the scene, among other subjects. Mr. Anderson testified that, although he did not specifically recall, his discussions with the Judge may have included some of these subjects, although they were not discussed with reference to sentencing.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “did or could have influenced the judge in his sentencing decision.”
    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.