This time, we’re comparing the lag time from grant to decision in criminal cases to the ultimate case result. In order not to bias the data, we begin by eliminating the death penalty and habeas corpus cases, where the determinants of lag time are quite different than non-death criminal cases.
Once again, there is a
This week, we’re looking at the relationship between lag time – the number of days from the grant of review by the Supreme Court to the final decision – and the result in the case. One might expect that lag time has very little relationship to the case result – surely it’s determined by the
Last time, we reviewed the Court’s civil cases, asking whether divided decisions from the Court of Appeal were more likely to be reversed in whole or in part than unanimous ones. This time, we’re turning our attention to the criminal cases and finding a very different result.
In only four of the past thirty-one years
Two weeks ago, we addressed the question of how common cases with a dissent at the Court of Appeal were on the Supreme Court’s docket. Our analysis illuminated the issue of whether it’s true that there’s no point in pursuing a petition for review from a unanimous Court of Appeal decision.
This week, we’re digging
Today, we’re reviewing Justice Groban’s participation in oral arguments in criminal cases for patterns. Once again, Justice Groban is relatively closely aligned with the majority in most cases.
Continue Reading What Are Justice Groban’s Question Patterns When He Disagrees With the Majority in Criminal Cases?
This week we’re concluding our review of the individual Justices’ question patterns during oral argument by looking at the record of Justice Groban since he took his seat in 2019. We begin as usual with civil cases.
Continue Reading What Are Justice Groban’s Question Patterns When He Disagrees With the Majority in Civil Cases?
When Justice Kruger votes with the majority in a criminal case, she follows the expected pattern, more heavily questioning the losing party. When she joins the majority in an affirmance, she averages 2.38 questions to appellants and 1.91 to respondents. When she joins the majority in a reversal, she averages 3.6 questions to respondents and 3 to appellants. When she joins the majority in a split decision, she averages 1.77 questions to respondents and 1.68 to appellants.
Continue Reading What Are Justice Kruger’s Question Patterns When She Disagrees With the Majority in Criminal Cases?
This week, we’re reviewing Justice Kruger’s oral argument question totals to see what we can infer from the data on her likely vote.
Continue Reading What Are Justice Kruger’s Question Patterns When She Disagrees With the Majority in a Civil Case?
We determined last time that Justice Cuellar tends to more heavily question appellants than respondents in civil cases regardless of how the majority is leaning. This time, we’re looking at the data for criminal cases.
Continue Reading What Are Justice Cuellar’s Question Patterns When He Disagrees With the Majority in Criminal Cases?
For the past few weeks, we’ve been reviewing individual Justices’ questioning at oral argument in civil and criminal cases since the Court first started posting argument videos in 2016. The question is this: if as a general matter, the party likely to lose the case gets more questions at oral argument, can we use argument analytics to spot likely dissenters? In other words, does a Justice likely to dissent ask more questions of the side he or she thinks should lose or the side the majority thinks should lose? This week, we’re looking at the data for Justice Cuellar, civil cases first.
Continue Reading What Are Justice Cuellar’s Question Patterns When He Disagrees With the Majority in Civil Cases?