We’ve been reviewing the data for the average length of majority opinions during the 1990s and comparing it for correlations to the unanimity rate.  In this post, we’re looking at the criminal docket. It turns out that the 1990s were a difficult time for this metric, given that the average length of majority opinions didn’t

A few posts ago, I noted that analytics research has demonstrated a correlation between the length of majority opinions and the rate of unanimous opinions – shorter opinions, more unanimity; longer opinions and less unanimity.  So what happened for civil cases between 1990 and 1999?

As we noted a few posts ago, majority opinions were

Today, we’re reviewing the Supreme Court’s criminal docket during the 1990s – were total caseloads declining and was the Court writing longer opinions?

For the decade, the Court decided 523 criminal cases.  The Court filed 17,588 pages of majority opinion, and average of 33.63 pages per case – half again longer than the average civil

This time, we’re measuring the length of Supreme Court review in civil cases by an alternative measure – the average number of days from the close of briefing to oral argument.  One caveat – this data set runs from the close of all briefing – including amici and any supplemental briefs – to oral argument. 

We conclude our series by reviewing the data for criminal, quasi-criminal and juvenile justice cases between the years 2010 and 2020.  Once again, Los Angeles led, accounting for 142 cases.  Riverside County was next, followed by San Diego, Orange, San Bernardino, Santa Clara, Sacramento and Alameda counties.  San Francisco, which was among the leaders in

Today, we’re reviewing the contents of our database, which includes every case decided by the California Supreme Court since January 8, 1990.  For every case, we’ve captured the following data points:

CIVIL CASES:

Official Reporter Citation

California Reporter Citation

Docket Number

Case Name

Petitioner

Petitioner Governmental Entity (Y/N)

Respondent Governmental Entity (Y/N)

Source of Appellate

Last time, we began our analysis by addressing the competing theories of judicial behavior.  Formalism, the oldest theory, teaches that judicial decision making can be explained and predicted based upon the facts, the applicable law and precedent and judicial deliberations – and nothing more.  But if formalism explains all of judicial decision making, then many