Yesterday, we looked at the court’s experience with amicus briefs in criminal cases for the first half of our study period, 1994-2005. Today, we look at the data for the second half of the period.
For the most part, the relationship between the sides was the same – petitioners tend to get more amicus support
Last week, we reviewed the year-by-year data since 1994 for amicus briefs, looking at whether more amici tend to support the petitioner or the respondent. This week, we’re looking at the Court’s experience with amicus briefs in criminal cases.
The primary lesson of the data is the obvious one: amicus briefs are far less commonplace
Yesterday, we looked at the year-by-year data in civil cases, dividing total amicus briefs up by the side supported – petitioner, respondent, and neither side/can’t determine. We discovered that three quarters of the time between 1994 and 2005, the petitioner averaged more amicus briefs than the respondent. So what about the second half of the
For the past several weeks, we’ve been reviewing the Supreme Court tenure of soon-to-retire Justice Kathryn Werdegar. This week, we begin a new topic. Several weeks ago, we tracked the average number of amicus briefs filed, case by case, from year to year. But with the expansion of our data library, we can now track
Yesterday, we announced that we’ve expanded the data library which powers the California Supreme Court Review – by a lot. We’ve added many new data points for all the cases which were already in the database, as well as moving the start point of the library back to November 1, 1994 – just before Associate
Fifty weeks (and just over a hundred posts) ago, we started the California Supreme Court Review, applying statistical and data analytic techniques to studying the decision making of the California Supreme Court. Our analysis was based upon a data library which we created based on dozens of data points drawn from every one of the
Yesterday, we analyzed the lag times – from grant of review to oral argument, and oral argument to decision – in the Court’s civil docket from 2008 to 2016. Today, we’ll address the data for the criminal docket. One definition – for cases such as the death penalty docket where there is no grant of
Last week, we began addressing the issue of the average lag time from grant of review to oral argument and from argument to decision, analyzing the data for the civil and criminal dockets from 2000 to 2007. This week, we’ll address the data for 2008 through 2016, beginning today with the civil docket.
There is
Yesterday, we analyzed the average lag time from grant of review to oral argument, and oral argument to decision, in civil cases between 2000 and 2007. Today, we turn our attention to the Court’s criminal docket for the same years.
For the entire period, the average lag time from grant of review to oral argument
This week, we begin a new phase of our analysis: how long does the average case remain pending at the California Supreme Court from grant of review to oral argument to decision, and what are the differences between civil, criminal and death penalty cases?
In Table 167 below, we report the mean number of days,