This week, we’re reviewing Justice Liu’s question patterns.  As before, our purpose is both to determine whether Justice Liu follows the overall trend when he’s in the majority – more heavily questioning the party that will lose – but also what happens when Justice Liu is dissenting.  Does he more heavily question the party that will lose the case, or the party he believes should lose the case?
Continue Reading What Are Justice Liu’s Question Patterns When He Disagrees With the Majority in Civil Cases?

When the Chief Justice joins an affirmance in criminal cases, she averages 3.49 questions to appellants and 1.53 questions to respondents.  When she joins the majority in a reversal, she averages 3.22 questions to respondents, 2.68 to appellants.  When she joins the majority in a split decision, she averages 4.23 questions to appellants, 1.55 to respondents.
Continue Reading What Are Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye’s Question Patterns in Criminal Cases When She Disagrees With the Majority?

A few weeks ago, we established that court-wide, the party which is likely to lose tends to get the most questions in oral argument.  Now, we’re investigating individual Justices’ records – when the Justice agrees with the majority, does he or she follow the usual pattern, and when he or she doesn’t agree, does the Justice more heavily question that party that will lose, or the party he or she thinks should lose?  This week, we’re looking at Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye’s data.
Continue Reading What Are Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye’s Question Patterns in Civil Cases When She Disagrees With the Majority?

For the last two weeks, we’ve been looking at the Supreme Court’s question patterns at a court-wide level.  We reviewed the academic literature studying oral argument questions at the U.S. Supreme Court, which has concluded that the party which will lose averages the most questions.  We then reviewed the year-by-year data at the California Supreme

Now we turn to the data for the criminal docket.  In outright reversals, respondents averaged more questions than appellants in three of five years between 2016 and 2020 – 2016, 2018 and 2020.

We mentioned in a previous post that there was some indication – notwithstanding the tiny data sets – that partial reversals might

Last week, we reviewed the academic literature on oral argument analytics and compared the data on oral arguments at the California Supreme Court.  Last week, we aggregated the data on reversals – reversals plus partial reversals (“affirmed in part, reversed in part”).  This week, we’re checking if the oral argument data is any different for

Yesterday, we surveyed the academic literature in oral argument analytics and then reviewed the data for 2016-2020 civil cases from the Supreme Court.  Today, we’re looking at the criminal docket.

Between its earliest posted arguments in 2016 and the end of August, the Court asked 8,256 questions in criminal, quasi-criminal, juvenile and mental health matters: